She said you're good.

Yes, good.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes, okay.

The regular meeting of the Annapolis City Council will begin at on Monday at March ninth, twenty twenty-six.

We'll be called to order at five forty-five.

I didn't say that very well.

At this time, we will have a moment of silence to gather ourselves to prepare prepare for the business ahead.

At this time, would everyone willing and able please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

And to the Republic for which one under this role with liberty and justice for all.

Yes, sir.

Mayor Littman.

Alderman Huntley.

Here.

Present.

Thank you.

Thank you.

City Attorney, will you please present the next item on the agenda?

The next item on the agenda is business and miscellaneous beginning with ID thirty three twenty-six the proposed closed session pursuant to annotated code of Maryland general provisions, Section Three B eight nine discussion topics update on co on collective bargaining negotiations and pending or potential litigation regarding the city dock project.

So moved.

I think the city council meeting of March 9th will resume.

We are going back on the record after having been on uh in closed session.

Uh Ms.

City Attorney, will you please present the next item on the agenda?

The next item on the agenda is the approval of the agenda.

Thank you.

At this time, I would entertain a motion to approve the agenda as amended to remove ordinances, reallocation of unexpended bond proceeds, and 0126, property tax, child care centers, family child care homes, and large family child care homes.

So moved.

So what do you point to?

Okay.

Alderman O'Neill, would you like to make the motion?

Mr.

Maycer, can I also make a motion to add a ceremonial item to the agenda?

Um today being the 53rd anniversary of a higher date of speaking to your microscope.

Thank you.

Absolutely.

We'll add that to the list.

Thank you.

Ald uh Alderman Smith Brown.

Any discussion?

I can't hear you.

Another motion.

Another motion.

Another motion.

Okay.

What's your motion?

Well, I would like to move to put the housing author update from the housing authority at the end of the agenda.

Okay.

Is there a second for that motion?

I'll second that motion.

Okay.

Um is there there's two motions now on the table.

Which do we take first?

Okay.

Let's keep it keep it as two separate motions.

All right.

Let me first take the um the motion that Alderman Savage just raised to change the order of the meeting to move the hack presentation to where do you want to move it to?

To the end of the agenda.

To the end of the agenda.

We had a second.

Any discussion on Alderman Savage's motion.

Um Alderman, you want to make your point and then we'll yeah, just so the rationale is that I'd I'd just prefer to have the public business be done early in the meeting so the public doesn't have to wait through.

And we have a very well, I shouldn't say very we have we're gonna have a complicated um potentially vote for uh blank on the number, but the um short-term rental moratorium, and I just think that should be so people don't have to wait till the end of the meeting to hear that conversation.

I also think we should be as bright-eyed and aware as we can be instead of having it pushed uh towards the end.

Okay, Alderman uh Huntley, then I think we saw a second hand too.

Uh Alderman Savage, I agree with your underlying reasoning, and I would hope we would do this in future, but I'm gonna vote against it just because I I think it's will be kinder to the people who we have asked who come here and present to us to not change it up on them in the moment.

But I I agree with your logic in the future.

So my logic in presenting the agenda is to first show the most respect for the people who are coming to be here at public hearings, whether it's to testify during the general uh public testimony or for public hearings on anything we have on the agenda.

Of course, they're welcome to stay, but I want to for the individual who wishes to testify and then go home.

I want to provide that opportunity as soon as possible.

The second priority I have after the general public and a public hearing is to have any of our guests and experts be able to conduct their business and then go home and again the uh anyone everyone is always welcome to stay.

My third priority is for any other directors or chiefs that we're asking to be here for particular legislation to allow them to present, and then the finally is for all of us, and we're here.

We are here till the end anyway, but that is my uh desired preference, and so I don't support that motion for the same underlying reason.

We're trying to get people in and out that wish to be.

So that's that's my thinking and setting the agenda the way I've set it.

Okay.

Uh yes, Alderman Savage.

I don't want to belabor it, but I just want to make the point that the hacker presentation.

Again, I've always had a long long had a problem with them presenting at council meetings.

Personally, I think council meetings should be preserved for public comment as well as legislative action.

There's no legislative action associated with this.

It should be a uh public presentation at the work session.

I've just, you know, we've had meetings in the past.

If they go, they because this can be depending on what's what's on their uh present in their presentation, can be a lengthy conversation.

And so we do have a set time.

If we if we hit 11 o'clock, we have to have a vote to continue.

Um, and uh we've had plenty of meetings in the past, maybe even when you're last on the council that went past that.

So okay, that's it.

Thank you.

All those in favor of Alderman Savage's motion to reorder to move the hack of presentation to be the last item on the agenda, please say aye.

Aye.

All those against say no.

No, no.

No.

Okay.

Would you take a roll call, please?

No.

Sound nine.

Aye.

Alderman Pati.

No.

All in the sand.

Aye.

All in the door.

No.

All the no.

All in audio.

Aye.

All of Mr.

Flynn.

Aye.

All move and all.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Motion carrying.

All right.

Motion carries the hacker presentation.

Is moved to the last item on the agenda for anyone who is here for that.

Uh now we have the initial motion to amend the agenda to remove 0526 and 0126 and add.

Did we have an item number?

Probably not.

We're going to talk 0 today.

March 9th recognition.

Uh, all those in favor of that motion, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

No abstaining.

The motion carries.

Okay.

What's that?

Um, Alderwoman O'Neill made that motion, and um Alderman Smith Brown did it.

Okay.

Ms.

City Attorney, please present the next item on the agenda.

The next item on the agenda is petitions, reports, and communications, beginning with update from Mayor.

Thank you.

Second.

Okay.

Good evening and welcome back to the Annapolis City Council.

And I get to have this is gets to be a fun moment.

I get to lead tonight with exciting news about the city dock resilience project.

I get that it's not news today.

This was news as a Friday.

But in case you didn't hear, our federal, state, and county partners, along with members of the city council, held a press conference on Friday at City Dock to announce that FEMA had officially signed off on our 35.5 million hazardous hazard mitigation grants.

As I said last Friday, I've been sleeping better since that decision.

This money along with federal, state, county, and city funds, which we previously secured, will help us get this much needed flood project across the finish line.

As of today, here's where we stand on city doc funding, which you can find in the updated capital improvement program or CIP.

There's 20 well, you a little hard to see, but if you look at the bar charts, those uh inserts that you can't see are available on annapolis.gov.

If you search for 2026, that's the current year we're in, capital improvement program.

Make sure if you click on one because you'll see both proposed and approved.

You want to click on the approved to see the detail on those two charts.

But you can see from the bar charts the information that I'm trying to express.

It includes 24 million dollars from the Mills Hillman concession agreement, 10 million dollars from the state of Maryland, 4.8 million in additional congressional earmarks, two million from the Anirondo County, and that's specific for the welcome center, Maritime Welcome Center, and now 33 million from FEMA's disaster recovery funds, plus an additional 2.5 million from their fit from the FEMA hazard mitigation.

That totals 76.3 million.

The city has previously approved an additional bond funding through for additional funding for the difference between that and I'll get to in a second the 87.7 million.

These figures do not include potential revenue from naming rights, sponsorships, and other partnerships opportunities, partnership opportunities that the city is pursuing, nor do they include exploring ways to reduce costs to offset increases that come with delays and and lawsuits.

More to come on those details in the upcoming capital budget as we update those projections.

Altogether, this allows us to move forward with the 87.7 million city dock resilience project, a critical investment to our to protect our waterfront, our downtown businesses, our community from the impacts of more intense and more frequent flooding.

I also want to note that this funding is for the city dockside.

You notice two inserts.

There's a separate capital project called our Compromise Street Pumping Project, which is currently estimated to cost 21 million.

And by current, I mean in the fiscal year 26 capital projects.

You'll get updates in April for the newest version.

And that is covered with separate grants and earmarks, ensuring that both projects can move forward without placing additional strain on our taxpayers.

You hear a lot of different numbers, either social media or regular media, and I just want you to all have a reset of what the actual numbers are as of today.

I'm incredibly proud of our city doc team who worked on the FEMA grant for over three years.

I'd like to call out David Mandel and Kevin Simmons from the Office of Emergency Management.

Barbogle, director of the Annapolis Public Works, and Eileen Foregerty, our City Doc Project Coordinator.

Can we give a round of applause to those NGOs police?

I also want to thank our partners in the county, state, and federal government who did everything they could to help us along the way.

And those individuals are named by um by name in our press release.

Thanks to these partnerships, we're making real progress on our work to protect Annapolis from the impacts of sea level rise and extreme weather.

This is a proud moment for our city and a clear example of what government can do for the public when local, state, and federal partners work together.

Thank you.

I am excited to announce that our month-long Golden Pass parking program began today.

This is running from today, March 9th through April 6th, where seniors 62 years and up can enjoy up to two hours of parking per day on Main Street, Maryland Ave, and at the Mills Hellman Garage.

Enrolling in the program costs just $20 for the entire period.

Simply register your vehicle tag either through the online portal or phone number, and once approved, submit payment.

To use the benefit, just drive up and park.

With your tag pre-registered, there is no need for to input a code or swipe a card.

This means that you could arrange for your parking again at Maryland Ave, Main Street, or Hillman Garage in this program before you leave home.

Once you do this, you'll be set through April 6th.

And this is also available to city and non-city residents.

Again, seniors 62 plus.

To sign up, you can apply by going to Annapolis.gov and clicking on the big button on the homepage that says Golden Pass Parking, or you can do it by phone.

Call 410-216-5620.

Next, our town hall series has is continuing through uh through all eight wards.

We've done four wards already.

We have four to go.

The last was in Ward 5 with Alderman Chandelmeyer.

We were at the Pitt Memorial Rec Center.

These are all being recorded, so you can go to the city's YouTube channel and watch previous events.

And for those who feel neglected by going last, I think we're getting better and better at each one, so you actually are get rewarded by being towards the end of this.

We're getting better at it.

Over the next two months, we'll be visiting the remaining four wards.

The next town hall is tomorrow, March 10th at 6:30 p.m.

We'll be visiting Mount Olive Community Center in Ward 3 with Alderman Smith Brown.

I know we're competing with a couple events tomorrow night, but ours is really important.

I hope you come see ours.

We hope to see you there.

After that, we'll be in ward one on April 7th with Alderman Huntley, and then we'll be in uh Alder in Ward 6 with Alder Woman Conte on April 23rd.

And last but definitely not least, we'll be in Ward 4 on May 14th with Alder Woman Also Johnson.

As a reminder, we plan to hold these town halls in every ward twice a year.

This is the spring series, where it's an introduction to city government where we bring bring directors and chiefs.

In the fall, we'll do it again with a different focus.

That'll be more of a focus on the city budget.

And that round of town halls will begin in July.

These are not uh your only chance.

This is not only a chance to meet your mayor and uh city council representative, but to meet your directors and chiefs who've been coming out late and staying with us to answer your questions.

To see the schedule, come go to Annapolis.gov, use the keywords engagement opportunities.

Next, Maryland Day is coming up Wednesday, March 25th.

On that day in 1634, the Ark and the Dove, which I assume are boats, arrived in what is now St.

Mary's County, kicking off nearly 400 years of Maryland history.

To commemorate each year, museums and parks around the state offer free and deeply discounted admission to the best places to learn about Maryland's history and culture.

This year, Maryland Day celebrations will begin on Thursday, March 19th.

All across the state, there will be special events and programs through Wednesday, March 25th.

Find a complete listing of these opportunities, Mayday activities on the city uh on Maryland Day.org.

And note that city offices are closed on Maryland Day, which again is is Wednesday, March 25th.

Next, the Annapolis Film Festival is almost here.

This annual festival, named by Movie Maker Magazine as one of the top 25 coolest festivals in the world, offers three days of film screenings and panels right here at Annapolis.

Whether you're a film buff or casual movie goer, there's something for everyone.

Opening night is Thursday, March 26th at Maryland Hall with screenings and events through Sunday, March 29th.

Tickets are now on sale, and you could pick up yours at Annapolis Filmfestival.com.

I want to highlight two volunteer commissions in the city of Annapolis that have openings.

The first is the Human Relations Commission, which accepts complaints of discrimination and proposes legislation on human relations.

This is an advisory commission.

The second is the Financial Advisory Commission, whose duties include reviewing collective bargaining agreements and compiling an annual report on the city's public debt.

These are only some of the many boards and commissions that have vacancies in the city of Annapolis.

If you've ever wanted to get involved, I encourage you to apply for a volunteer position on one of our boards and commissions.

These bodies give Annapolis residents like you the ability to volunteer and give back to your community, helping to ensure the city government runs well.

If you're interested in applying, visit the boards and commissions page on Annapolis.gov to find a full list of our boards and commissions and the link to apply for each.

Get involved and make your voice heard in government.

Next, back to a city dock topic.

The magenta shuttle now includes stops at Doc Street and the U.S.

Naval Academy, adding speed and convenience to any Annapolis visit.

Riders can catch the magenta shuttle at any of their garages along the West Street corridor for a convenient complementary ride.

Whether you're heading to a meeting, dining out, shopping, or visiting the yard, the expanded route offers a smoother connection between parking and your final destination.

By parking once and hopping on the Bagenta shuttle, residents and visitors alike can help keep Dock Street and surrounding businesses vibrant and open while enjoying enjoying a more convenient trip to the heart of Annapolis.

And two more comments.

First, I want to congratulate by I'm sorry, congratulate Burr Vogel.

He's the director of Annapolis Department of Public Works for winning the award for the 2025 Land Manager of the Year from the Mid-Atlantic Off-Road Enthusiasts, Moore.

This award is in recognition recognition of his work to open the new off-road biking trails at Waterworks Park.

Congratulations, Burr.

As mayor, it's important to recognize the hardworking public servants who keep Annapolis running.

The city of Annapolis is fortunate to have so many dedicated public servants who work tirelessly to improve the city they love.

And some of them are sitting right here at the dais tonight.

One final comment.

Yes.

The next item on the agenda is reports by committees.

Thank you.

Any members wish to get started?

Alderman Savage.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

So environmental matters, our next meeting is going to be uh this Thursday, March 12th at uh 3 o'clock.

And so everybody is aware we do have 026, which is the mooring requirements in city waters, but we're most likely going to be postponing that because we're still awaiting the findings from the port wardens, and I believe I heard that staff might be working on some changes to that.

Um that leaves we'll be having three other items for discussion.

One will be uh tomorrow public works will be updating us on the latest technology that's going to be utilized for the city dock flood barriers downtown.

Um we'll also continue our discussion about the stormwater fee and the rebate program, and then just getting our update from the resilience and sustainability office.

Uh so that is all, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you.

Any questions for Alderman Savage?

Okay, any other committee chairs wish to present?

Okay, Alderman Thorpe.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

On uh the audit committee will meet Monday morning, March 16th at 8 a.m.

on on uh Zoom call.

Uh we will be reviewing the audit.

Um so congratulations to the finance team uh for completing the audit.

We'll be reviewing that.

And then on Monday evening, March 18th, um, in Ward 8, not not to confuse with uh the mayor's town halls at Ward 8.

Uh we'll be having Ward 8 Town Hall meeting in which Annapolis Police Department's Captain Guy Thacker will be briefing the traffic plan for highly attended events in Eastport.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any questions for Alderman Thorpe?

Okay.

Uh Alderwoman's Also Johnson.

Thank you, Mayor.

On Wednesday, the transportation committee will be meeting at four o'clock.

Fantastic.

Thank you.

Any questions for Alderwoman's Also Johnson?

Okay.

Any committee chairs?

Very good.

Ms.

City Attorney, will you please present the next item on the agenda?

Yes, the next item on the agenda is are the ceremonial items.

Okay.

I don't have that as my next item.

Oh, yes, thank you.

Sorry.

Alderwoman O'Neill, will you please present the additional ceremonial item?

Thank you very much, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, in recognition of Women's History Month, it's very exciting to present.

Um Captain, um, sorry, acting chief Amy McGuez is going to present um a certificate to Barbara Hopkins, who has um as of today celebrated 53 years of police service to Annapolis.

So today is actually the exact day 53 years ago that retired Captain Barbara Hopkins became uh the first female police officer in the city of Annapolis, 1973.

And she was not only the first female police officer, she was also the first female to reach any rank, including captain.

And acting chief right, and you've been acting chief, so I still am not the achieving any highest rank.

I will say that I worked in every uh division in the department because they didn't really want me there, they moved me around a lot.

And um I had the pleasure of hiring recommending Amy for to be hired twice.

Yes, first as a dispatcher and then as a police officer.

Thank you.

Thank you for doing that.

And uh Captain Hopkins was also instrumental in our first accreditation from Calia.

So she's the reason we started being accredited through the commission on accreditation for law enforcement agencies, and she's the reason we still are.

So that's a big accomplishment for us.

I was an asset serving team leader for CALEA for 15 years, and I got to steal ideas from police departments all across the country.

Yes, the good ideas.

And Carl Snowden, I remember Carl when I got hired, he was in high school.

Thank you very much.

Ms.

City Attorney, please present the next item on the agenda.

The next item in the on the agenda is comments by the general public.

Thank you.

During this time, we will ask everyone who first signed up, and then if you didn't sign up, I'll give an opportunity to then come uh speak.

I'll invite you, I'll do it in groups of three, one at a time.

Come to the podium.

Start with your name and address, please.

If you don't, I'll have to run interrupt you and remind you.

The um this is the time to speak about any topic you want, except those that are here for a separate public hearing, and that's limited to if you're here for 0326, Annapolis Harbor Lines at Hawkins Cove.

Please wait for that agenda item.

So at this time, I will call Reverend Michael Parker, followed by Alderman, former Alderman Carl Snowden, and followed by Godfrey Phelps.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council.

Thank you.

I'm the Reverend Michael Parker.

I have the distinct honor of serving as a senior pastor of Asbury United Methodist Church on West Street, as we affectionately know as Mother Asbury, the oldest African American congregation in not only our city but our county.

And I consider it an honor to be the 34th appointed pastor of that congregation as of July the 1st of this past year, which also made me by default uh the last pastor that uh Delorma Goodwin uh had, as we all affectionately know and knew as D.

Um, unfortunately, uh I did not have the luxury and the pleasure uh that so many of my other parishioners did of knowing her and the intense work uh that she did, not only in our local church, but also uh in the community as well.

She is very noted in our church, primarily uh with having served in our women's ministry, but she is the reason.

Asbury is as connected to the community as we are.

She kept her thumbprint uh on the community and ensured that the church stayed engaged in that way.

So I'm honored to stand here tonight on behalf of her congregation, where she was a faithful member for many, many, many decades to stand as we honor her tonight uh as she is being remembered.

Thank you.

Thank you.

As Alderman, as former Alderman Snowden is approaching, I'd like to uh recognize former Alderman Kenny Kirby sitting that was sitting next to him.

Kenny Kirby, thank you.

Uh Mr.

Mayor, two things.

First, thank you and members of the council who co-sponsored the legislation that will create this ceremonial street sign for D.

Goodwin.

Would the people who are here in support of that resolution, please stand you so very much?

Call Snowden, 230 Garden Gate Lane, Annapolis.

There are a lot of things that could be said about D.

Goodwin, but I want to, for the record, and for those who are watching, this is a very important moment.

D.

Goodwin, of course, uh was the co-founder of the caucus of African American leaders.

But when you look around the city of Annapolis, you literally you literally see her legacy.

A few blocks from here, the guardians of the First Amendment.

D.

Goodwood worked tirelessly to ensure that that memorial that was dedicated to those who lost their lives at the Capitol in 2019.

She spare here to that effort.

When you look at the Martin Luther King Jr.

Memorial, it's uh exists at Anne Runda Community College.

She was involved in that.

She was involved in making um the Civil Rights Foot Soldiers Memorial when Mayor Josh Corne was mayor.

She worked with him to bring that abut.

And this very recently was involved, of course, in making the Pern J.

Mitchell Memorial, which is the latest memorial in the city of Annapolis, and was working on the final memorial that I'll certainly be involved in was the Malcolm X Memorial, which will be built and dedicated later this summer.

So I just want to thank the City Council as a whole for supporting this particular legislation.

And then finally, uh Mr.

Mayor, uh, I want to join with Dr.

Mark Wainwright, who had requested that we meet with you, uh, members of the recreation and parks, um, and members of the community.

So we all have a better understanding of where the Stanton Community Center is going.

It's a project that we fully support.

We want to make sure that that project is funded to its fullest.

So we look forward to getting a date and a time that we can meet with you with all the woman on Neil, whose ward is in, and uh the director of of recreation and parks.

So we have an opportunity to have some input.

And Regina, it's so good to see you.

God, you look good, Carol.

Thank you so very much.

Thank you, Alderman.

While we're uh Godfrey Phelps, while you come up, I also want to recognize former Alder Woman woman Cynthia Carter.

Yes.

Okay.

Godfrey Phelps.

The next individuals will be Gerald Stansbury and then Chuck Hurley.

Good afternoon.

Mayor.

I want to thank you for getting the.

You'll start with your name and address.

I'm sorry to interrupt you.

Godfrey Phelps, 701 Glenwood Street.

Thank you.

Um I'm not here to win no popularity contest.

I'm here for justice.

And I think I notified your office.

Two issues, which is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to wheeling dealing and stealing.

And I'm talking about 501 C, which the councils throughout the county or in Annapolis are not registered with the state of Maryland.

This is what allows them to steal our money and deprive us of our activities and our constitutional civil rights and ACOP.

They don't want to register with the state of Maryland because they know this is going to spark a mass investigation.

Money has been stolen for seven or eight years.

Every person that pay taxes should be alone of this, because this has been going on for years.

I'm a whistleblower.

And Congress ordered them to give me a case number.

I have called the uh uh controls of currency on the Bank of America.

They would not do nothing.

Neither would the Department of Taxation in Baltimore.

It's ridiculous.

So I'm asking you to uh launch an investigation.

It's clear that these individuals must be registered with the state of Maryland.

If they're not, they will continue to steal.

We have a conflict of interest, multiple conflicts of interest with council members that sit on the board.

They don't know anything.

The treasures names have never been on the bank account.

The Belows clearly states that the treasurer must control the money.

But these treasures for them names never was put on the bank account.

This need to be looked into.

Then the other thing is uh Mr.

Mr.

Phelps, please wrap up your testimony.

Bishop Coates uh he gave Melissa Evans the authority to get checks in her name.

I asked the last administration to investigate this because we don't know how much money she's collecting or where it's going.

This is unprecedented, and everybody should be concerned about money that's coming in.

Thank you, Mr.

Phelps.

Please wrap up your testimony.

All righty.

Uh I again I heard you uh sign a commission.

Um dealing with the counts and everything.

I would like to be a part of that commission because uh, you know, if people don't know the law, they don't know what to look for.

Okay, thank you for your testimony.

Thank you.

Gerald Stansbury and then Chuck Curley.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor, City Council.

Thank you again for your actions that on this legislation that we're doing for D.

Goodman.

Real briefly, my name is Gerald Stansbury, 8078 Escalon Avenue.

I am a lifetime residence of Annapolis.

Just recently moved to Pasadena.

I just want to tell you that as a Maryland State Conference President emeritus, Dee Goodwin's actions stretch further than just here in Annapolis.

Her work, Mr.

Mayor, you said you should recognize the work of the people.

Leaders are easily recognized, but it's the workers that get things done.

Dee Goodwin was one of those workers.

Her work stretched not just here in Annapolis, on the eastern shore, where we have nine counties in the along with the African American leaders.

She's able to make things change over there for the quality of life for people.

So we appreciate that.

Along with me, that's the president of the Ana Ronda County branch in ACP, Mr.

Steve Waddy.

I'd like for him to stand.

Meredith Jack is also here.

We all in support.

And we we got our eyes on you.

Okay, we got eyes on you.

We're gonna hold you accountable.

Um, you know, we will agitate, okay, and try to make change.

So today we want to thank you for the decision that you're making.

And I hope I seen everyone stand up unanimously, and that's a great thing, you know, to see you all working together in unity.

That's what it takes to get the dream work.

Okay, teamwork makes a dream work.

So again, I know you said that you was gonna allow some of the folks who didn't get a chance to sign up to say a few words.

Otherwise, I would have Mr.

Obadi, who is our current and the Runda County president to come stand up, who is also a soldier in the fight for justice and equality and liberty for all people.

So you may hear the NAACP and the acronym, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

Well, we are the National Association for the Advancement of All People.

Our struggle has been every struggle for anyone who's fighting for civil rights.

We marched, we suffered, we designed, we were hung, all those things that we suffered.

There's other people out there suffering too, but we are here now to support, give our support for what you're about to do, and we thank you from the bottom of our hearts, because so many times the work of the workers go unrecognized.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, sir.

Mr.

Hurley, and then Stephen Waddy is next.

Yes.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor, members of the City Council.

I'm Chuck Hurley, uh longtime member of the Annapolis Human Relations Commission.

But since we don't have a quorum, I'm speaking as a president of Ward 1, uh Five Park Place, um uh Annapolis, Maryland.

Um I really strongly support the effort.

I'm honored to be here to support the distinguished service of D.

Goodwin to the Annapolis City Relations Commission, among other things.

Carl and others have said so many other things she has done.

She was a pillar of the community, co-founder of the Caucus of African American leaders, and very much deserves uh the honor that is uh pending.

I also respectfully uh uh support uh the effort to suspend the rules and perhaps make it happen tonight.

Uh as a separate issue, I I thank you, Mr.

Mayor, for the attention you put on the In Relations Commission.

We still don't have a quorum.

We have three pending uh real uh complaints to deal with.

I understand uh Alderman Thorpe may have gotten us uh recruit, and I thank you for that.

Talk with that uh council uh Alderman Schaldemyer.

But if any of the members of the council have uh constituents that would like to serve, if any members of the audience uh would be interested in serving on the Annapolis Human Relations Commission, we very much need a uh a quorum.

We need at least two more members, and then we will proceed uh to make uh Annapolis a city that uh knows no hate.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Wadi and then Faye Belt and Matthew Wallace.

Good evening.

My name is Stephen Whitey.

I live at 7968 Heather Miss Drive in Severn, Maryland.

I am the president of the Ana Rondo County NAACP.

We definitely want to thank you on behalf of the NAACP for honoring Dee Goodwin for all of her hard work.

Um Dee Goodwin is still with us today, as witnessed by people in this room.

Uh her presence, her grace, her joy, her style, her flair, her commitment.

It all inspired us.

And uh Dee would have been with us.

So she was with us making good trouble on this past Saturday.

Definitely want to thank you all for attending.

Um that march is in in D.

Goodwin's essence.

Amelia Boynton, uh, Amelia Boynton, uh, Scepter McClark, Ella Baker.

These are the people that that Dee Goodwin sits with on the throne of civil rights.

And so we we are here to honor her.

We definitely appreciate uh the city of Annapolis for doing so.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Mr.

Wyatt.

Ms.

Belt.

Good evening, everyone.

Thank you, um, Mayor, and also the City Council and the people here to represent and uphold what you're doing and giving us as Appanitic American Americans as we go forth, continue to live in Annapolis City to honor us, but not even honoring us, but to recognize us, to see us as we go forth.

I had an opportunity to be with Miss Goodwin.

And so, did I tell you where I live?

5324 Al Jones Drive, Shady Side, Maryland.

I apologize.

I'm sorry, I missed it too.

Okay.

As we go forth, it's an honor, and we are glad we have a lot of gratitude for you to name a street after Dee.

Right now, and I feel as though her energy, her spirit is here with us.

Then that she is probably smiling upon what's going to happen.

It's a very important act of uh commemoration that provides public recognition of her life and her legacy.

Often serving as we know that it'll be a permanent living memorial, the sign, the street that we will walk up and down.

And as we walk up and down, we could feel her energy and all the things that she has done throughout her life, as you had heard the many testimonies before me.

And it honors her and helps maintain the community memory and can offer closure as we go forth because she is loved.

And it's a way that we celebrate her achievements, ensure that she's not forgotten.

And as we transform the personal memory into a public street, we thank you and we thank everyone as we continue to up and down the street and feel her presence.

Thank you, Ms.

Bell.

Mr.

Wallace.

Good evening, Council.

My name is Matthew Wallace.

I lead a community food resiliency nonprofit uh focused in Eastport and across Annapolis's ward six.

My address is 701 Chesapeake Avenue.

I'm here to update you on my last uh presence a month ago on the Eastport Community Farm Project.

Uh we've had the immense excitement, honored to break ground on Friday, getting the youth in motion.

They're incredibly motivated to see this farm become a reality for their community and for an incredibly enriching space for them to enjoy through the summer and the years to come.

I'm grateful for the city council support to this point.

And I'd just like to make it known that the last key component here is our permit for the greenhouse and fence, which is due next Tuesday.

It's permit number BLDC 2026-00017.

This is the last key component.

The Office of Um Planning and Zoning has been incredibly responsive to this point.

We commend them for this, and we are looking forward to making this project a reality with community members and incredible community partners, including no harm from the mayor's office, has been an incredible um sort of feedback, encouragement, and presence at our rollout events as we make this community food resiliency project a reality in Esport.

Thank you.

Thanks for your work.

Mr.

Wallace, hold on a second.

All the woman O'Neill.

Can I thank you?

Just very quickly, I do want to say that Matthew is first involved with Food Fridays six years ago and helped us.

So it's not like he's new on the scene in helping Annapolis City residents get good quality food.

So thank you, Matthew.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, at this time, we finished everybody that's signed up, but at this time, if there's anybody that would uh like to come up and speak, this is your time.

If uh we have the first individual, if there's anyone else, please feel free to line up on my right by the wall so we could move you through quickly.

Good evening.

You start with your name and address.

My name is Jack Will and Boone Alsa, and I live at 7370 and in Lane Glenn Burney, Maryland, 21060.

Good evening, Mayor Lippman and City Council members.

I'm here to support the resolution that the city council has done.

I want to thank each and every one of you on behalf with uh for D Goodwin.

Dee Goodwin was a very, very good friend of mine.

We were very, very close, and she has always worked for the community.

She's uh for a very, very long time.

You've heard of the number of projects that she's worked on, but she has been in the background for so long, longer than people know, may even know about.

As the founding member of the caucus of African American leaders, we work closely yet together, as well as with the NAACP.

I would like to thank her husband, George, for loaning her to us.

And I know we took her away from him for many, many days and for a very long time.

So again, thank you for naming this street after Dee Goodwin, a street that she grew up on, Northwest Street, and a street that I was on as well when I was in Annapolis.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, Mayor and members of the council.

My name is Patty Cousins, and I'm a resident of Annapolis living at 60 Southgate Avenue.

Thank you.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight.

I'm here to express my support for a temporary moratorium on new short-term rentals.

I believe the city needs time to carefully assess the impacts of our current permissive short-term rental policy.

Annapolis is not just a destination, it's a community.

And I think you've seen that from everybody who's been at the podium ahead of me tonight.

Our neighborhoods are places where people raise families, know their neighbors, and rely on a sense of stability and shared responsibility.

When the concentration of short-term rentals grows too high, that residential character begins to erode.

Especially in downtown Annapolis, homes that once housed long-term residents are increasingly being converted into investment properties owned by non-resident investors, designed for transient use.

That reduces the availability of housing for people who actually live and work in Annapolis, including teachers, service workers, and young families who want to put down put down roots here in an affordable way.

It also affects the daily quality of life in our neighborhoods.

Short-term rentals bring frequent turnover of visitors who may not be familiar with or respect the local expectations around noise, trash, and parking, especially when host or non-residents investors, the impacts felt by the people who live next door are year-round.

A community made up primarily of residents, people who live here full-time is ultimately what sustains our schools, civic institutions, and local economy.

There's also the broader concern with the city's current ability to enforce standards.

The city's planning director has testified in the past in favor of the temporary moratorium, noting the surge in applications and the slow progress on compliance.

A temporary moratorium is not about eliminating short-term rentals, it's about giving the city time to evaluate whether the current rules are achieving the balance we want between tourism and neighborhood stability and would allow the council to review data, study neighborhood impacts, and consider whether additional guardrails are needed.

You can see it here tonight.

Annapolis has always been a special place because of its strong neighborhoods and engaged residents.

Taking a pause now is a responsible step that allows us to protect those qualities while making thoughtful, evidence-based decisions about the future.

I want to thank Mayor Littman and Alderwoman O'Neill for your vocal support on the temporary moratorium, and I urge the entire council to adopt the temporary moratorium on new short-term rentals while an evaluation takes place.

Thank you.

Good evening, older woman.

Good evening to everyone.

I stand in support of the naming of the street and in honor of Dee Delorma Goodwin.

I know DeLorma from way back, okay, before she most people in here besides her brothers and uh I guess if she has any aunts anything here, but that she used to travel to New York to visit with me and my sister and my family when she was just a little girl and a teenager.

But uh I can't say any more than anyone has already said.

I served on many committees with her and and supported she and I both supported some of the action that was taken here in Annapolis to hold the city together to honor the those who we need to honor it and the monuments and things that were built.

But Dee has done a lot of work and she's always been a good person.

She's had a heart of goal and has always been there, but I stand in support of that, and I pray and I thank it.

Thank you, Ms.

Mr.

Knight.

Good evening, Mayor Littman and City Council.

First of all, I just want to say this that legacy is important.

Legacy is how we remember the work that has been done by individuals in the past as we move forward.

And I want to commend you, Mayor, and the city council for moving forward on this resolution to honor my late sister D.

Goodwin.

I'd be remiss, first of all, if I didn't acknowledge the family.

Would the family please stand?

Please.

Her husband, daughter, Donald, please stand.

My name is Equavian Knight.

I'm sorry, I apologize.

401 Silverleaf Court, Glenn Burney, Maryland.

Um, and I just want to once again to thank you for what you're about to do in memory of my sister and our family member.

She was a uh a great leader, not only of the of our family, but of this community as a whole.

And there was a song that's that song that says, May the work I've done speak for me.

And I think certainly the work that she has done speaks for her in volumes, and once again, we acknowledge you for acknowledging her.

Thank you.

Good evening, counsel.

My name is Debbie Odom.

I live 217 Admiral Drive in Annapolis.

I come here on a different angle for tonight.

I have residents who's in my community and in other communities are facing with letters of eviction due to astronomical outstanding pricing of their rent that they have to pay that uh was overlooked in the housing department.

We go to housing house until you go back to your rental office.

You go to your rental office until you go back to housing.

So my main thing was to come in and put a light on that issue.

And I hope that my councilman will answer my calls and talk to me in reference to some of these things.

I just wanted to say I appreciate you all, and I thank you for letting me come up today.

Okay.

Ms.

Hunham.

Ms.

The uh director of uh housing authorities was here earlier.

I don't know if she's in the room.

I don't see I'm not making eye contact at the moment, but she is here.

If you wish to uh talk with her, she might be able to direct you to the right person.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Okay, let me back get back up a little bit and come back forward.

Good evening.

Good evening.

My name is Argo Duanis.

I live at 10501 C Eaglewood Road in Annapolis.

I I want to first of all thank the council for putting forward a resolution that will make our beloved Delorma Goodwin in her um field, her sphere of influence.

She was always known as D.

But I'm gonna take it back home, back home to the old fourth ward, because that's where Delama came from.

Northwest Street.

I lived on West Washington Street, where the parking garage is, 60 West Washington Street.

Delorma is my daughter's auntie.

And Delorme and I go way back from childhood.

Delorma has always been a trendsetter.

She's always been a leader.

She's always been that soft power.

Am I right, Paul?

Absolutely.

She was that soft power behind Cal.

She was the queen with humility, dignity, and grace.

She didn't, she wasn't pretentious, but she had a power.

And she had a commitment to make a difference, not only in her family, which she was the mama bear, she was the make matriarch.

She was there all in all.

I know you're here with the with us right now.

I can feel your spirit.

Delorma, when she showed up, she showed up with a smile on her face.

I know I can get wendy because she has touched, moved and inspired all of us to become the best and highest version of ourselves.

She was focused on a mission, and that mission has always been to be a present and beneficial, beneficial presence in everybody's life.

And I know what I'm talking about.

You didn't even have to ask her.

And she always always knows, she always knew what you needed.

So I want to say all hail to the Queen.

Because I know she is here with us right now.

Her presence, I can feel her.

I can feel her touching each and every one of us.

And I just want to thank you again for this opportunity to name Northwest Street, D.

Goodman Way.

Am I right?

All praises.

All praises, all praises.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor.

Good evening.

City Council.

My name is Roger Allensons Jr.

I live at 114 Oberry Court.

Now I'm gonna come on a different note because I'm gonna be honest.

I have other things to take care of.

So I'm uh speak on something that's regarding hacker, and for it to be pushed to the back end, that's a whole different story that I'm not even gonna go with.

But for me being a resident at my location for over seven years, I have experienced mold twice in my unit, have said something to Hacker, have said something to my runner office.

It took them months to take care of it.

This has affected my health tremendously, and something needs to be done regarding this because I know I'm not the only resident that has experienced mold or the lack of housing authority or property management to do their job successfully.

Okay, any other individuals wish to speak during the general comment period.

Okay.

Seeing no motion in chambers, I declare comments by the general public closed.

Ms.

City Attorney, before you call the next item, anyone who was here to that just spoke on behalf of D, I just want to thank you for your testimony tonight.

And just to help you just to know what to expect tonight.

We have a few other items on the agenda.

There's a uh public hearing where we have a few people coming to speak, and we have a few other matters before we get to that item on the agenda.

At that point, it'll be introduced, and I expect a motion to suspend the rule so we can go right to a direct vote.

By all means, you're welcome to stay and uh acknowledge that, but just in case you do not intend to stay, I just want to take this moment to thank you all for being here.

Appreciate your support.

D meant a lot to a lot of us, and we're all thinking of her, and we miss her sincerely and deeply.

Um so just want to thank you for being here tonight.

Thank you.

Ms.

City Attorney, before you may you please present the next time on the agenda.

The next item on the agenda is a public hearing beginning with ordinance 0326, Annapolis Harbor Lines at Hawkins Cove for the purpose of changing the City of Annapolis Harbor Line at Hawkins Cove to allow for implementation of the Hawkins Cove Restoration Project and matters generally related to Harbor Lines.

Thank you.

At this time, I'm going to call the uh individuals that signed up to speak, starting with Debbie Odom, followed by Matthew Wallace and Bill Borwigan.

There's a couple other individuals, and then if you haven't signed up, I'll still give you an opportunity to speak.

Okay.

Okay, that makes sense.

Uh Mr.

Wallace, did you intend to sign up on this form as well?

Yes, please come up.

You may begin to start with the name and address again, please.

Good evening, Council.

Again, Matthew Wallace, 701 Chesapeake Avenue.

Um I'm here for the Hawkins Cove um Marina Wine uh readjustment.

Um and foremost, on behalf of Mr.

Tyrone Brown, longtime community member of Harbor House, who is currently at work.

He asked me to be here to put his name forward in support of this being with the environment down at the current dock is important to him.

And so is the moving forward of this project.

Mr.

Tyrone Brown would like to be here to address you all.

Um also on behalf of Sarah Krisek, a longtime member of the Naples Maritime Museum, says that it's pretty darn important that this project moves forward.

So she asked me to put um put her name out as well in support of the project.

Uh further uh my own testimony.

Connecting with many community members about neighborhood food systems and food sovereignty.

You hear about the important role that the water plays for food access to be a treasured food resource for wellness within the community for for generations.

Now filled with sediment from various sources.

There is not a lot of life left in this river.

As a neighborhood food systems advocate, I'm here to encourage the uh the moving forward of this project for the youth enrichment, of course, but as as well as a valued food source for our communities.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Wallace.

Mr.

Borwigan, followed by Jess Packler and Don Johnson.

Good evening, Mayor Mayor Lipman and members of the City Council.

My name is uh Bill Boyer Wigan and I live in one 519 First Street here in Annapolis.

I'm here this evening speaking on behalf of the Eastport Civic Association.

ECA strongly supports 0326, which would revise the city Annapolis City Harbor Lines at Hawkins Cove and lay the groundwork for the construction of a pier that will enable citizens to use the waterfront for recreational purposes.

This project has been a long time in the making, and ECA is pleased to support this important effort.

Eastport is a community defined by water.

Our residents have long cherished their connection to the Chesapeake Bay and the water that surrounds our community.

And for the same reason we understand deeply what this means when a neighborhood is cut off from the from that heritage.

Hawkins Cove sits within the traditional boundaries of Eastport, adjacent to the city's largest public housing development harbor house, where residents have long been unable to access Hawkins Cove because of the waters are filled with silt.

To the point where kayaks and other small watercraft cannot be launched.

It is time to fix this problem for the entire Eastport community.

By amending the harbor line to allow a pier to extend to the inevitable waters, this ordinance re removes a regulatory barrier that has stood in the way of real meaningful progress.

Combined with the Eastport Choice Neighborhood Initiative and the city's equitable public water access plan.

This project represents a thoughtful coordinated investment in a more inclusive Annapolis.

The Eastport Civic Association recognizes that restoring the ecolog ecology of Hawkins Cove, allowing for small watercraft access, and later on improving improving the uh Jason Park or net benefits to the entire Eastport community.

ECA commands Alderman Thorpe, Mayor Lebman, and the legislation's co-sponsors for bringing this ordinance forward, and we urge the council to move it to the next stage of legislative review without delay.

Annapolis is a maritime city.

Every resident deserves to share this legacy.

Thank you.

I'll be pleased to answer any questions, and I'll submit a copy of my testimony for the record.

Thank you.

Ms.

Packler, followed by Miss Johnson.

Hi, my name is Jess Packler.

I live at 506 President Street, which is about a block and a quarter from Hawkins Cove in Eastport.

And I am here to support this legislation to change the harbor line.

My family has spent most my I have four children that are 19 through 11, and they have all grown up in Hawkins Cove.

Hawkins Cove is an incredibly important part of the Eastport neighborhood that most of the Eastport neighborhood doesn't know about.

It is a path to Truxton Park that people can use to get from anywhere on the Eastport Peninsula to Hawkins Cove.

It is a water access for all of us who live in the president area of um of Eastport.

And as was talked about at the last uh public at the last public count city council meeting, we do not have a lot of public water access.

Unlike the other side of Spa Creek, which has 12 public water accesses, we have one usable public water access on our side of Spa Creek, and really that's pretty much even from the end of the peninsula all the way back.

We need more public water access in Eastport.

Hawkins Cove is a wild, untouched area.

Uh this project keeps it a wild, untouched area, but allows people to access that wild, untouched area.

It allows our residents of Eastport to access the water that we all should be able to access because we live in Annapolis, and that is what we are all about.

We are a water town.

This town was founded because of the water being here.

Hawkins Cove was formally a farm.

It was formally, there's so many histories about how that water was accessible to the public and it needs to be accessible.

Extending this harbor line will not affect the privacy of anyone who lives along Hawkins Cove.

All it will do is allow all of us who live near Hawkins Cove to access the waters of Spa Creek and Hawkins Cove.

In the last 10 years, there have been major things that have been done along Hawkins Creek and the Hawkins Cove area.

There has been a major storm remediation project.

We have beavers in the area.

We have nesting ospreys in the area.

You can occasionally see eagles going over.

We have deer.

The amount of wildlife in that area has increased, and having this access will allow more of our neighbors and our community to actually access wildlife and the water and our neighborhood and nature right here in our neighborhood.

So please pass this.

Don't listen to anyone trying to be nimby and say that they don't want more people in their special place because this is all of our special place.

It is a part of the city of Annapolis.

It belongs to all of us.

Please let this go forward so that we can all access what we all should be able to access.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello, I'm Donna Johnson.

I live at Elimahondja Madison Street.

Um I'm a um a hacker resident.

Um I'm just coming to say about the um Hawk and Cove.

I've been there since I was eight, and we always had access to going down there too.

We called it a pawn.

Um, before the Annapolis Howland 30 building even came there, it was a lot of woods.

We was able to um go through to go through um trust and parks.

Um the kids got to go there to do the fishing and uh just go to the picnics and stuff.

So I'm just thinking that um oh whatever y'all are doing, I really don't know.

I I keep hearing about it, and I was just asked to speak upon about me knowing my history there, and I've basically been there all my life.

So and to see it built back up would be a nice thing because it's seen like it's just nothing but like mud now.

The piers are gone under, and it was like a really nice place to be.

Okay, thank you, Ms.

Johnson.

If there's anyone else at the time that would like to speak to this legislation, now is your time to come forward.

Okay, seeing no motion in the chambers.

I declare public hearing on 0326 closed.

Ms.

City Attorney, please call the next item on the agenda.

The next item on the agenda is approval of the consent calendar items on the consent calendar include journals of proceedings, CCM 2226 special meeting minutes, CCM 2926 regular meeting minutes, CCM 2232 special meeting minutes.

Appointment and reappointments.

AP1326, the appointment of Jan Lee on the Board of Supervisors of Elections, AP1426, the reappointment of Liam Mercer on the Board of Supervisors of Elections, and AP1526, the reappointment of Deborah Yatsuk at the Board of the Board of Supervisors of Elections.

Thank you.

Are there any objections to proceeding with the consent calendar?

Okay.

Seeing none on interchange of motion to approve the consent calendar.

Thank you, Alderman Smith Brown.

Is there a second?

Second.

Although um, sorry, Madam City Clerk, please call the roll.

Yes, sir.

Mayor Mitch.

Yes.

Alderman Shannemeyer.

I'll woman McConti.

Alder Missavage.

Aye.

Alderman Dor.

Aye.

Alderman Huntley.

Hi.

Alderwoman O'Neill.

Aye.

Aldama Smith Brown.

Aye.

Aldwoman also don't say.

Aye.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Motion carries.

Ms.

City Attorney, please present the next item on the agenda.

The next item on the agenda is legislative actions on first readers beginning with charter amendments CA 126 updating requirements for publication of the Charter and Code of the City of Annapolis for the purpose of removing outdated provisions of the city's charter, rewriting requirements for compiling and publishing the charter and code of the city of Annapolis, allowing for publishing paper or electronic versions of the charter and code of city of Annapolis and generally relating to the codification of charter amendments and ordinances.

Thank you.

Is there a motion to adopt CA 126 on first reader?

So moved.

Thank you, Alderman.

Chandelmeyers, their second all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed say nay.

Okay.

The motion carries.

I refer CA126 to rules and city government committee.

Ms.

City Attorney, please present the next item on the agenda.

The next item on the agenda is resolution R526 designating Northwest Street as an honorary street in memory of D Lorma D.

Goodwin for the purpose of commemorating longtime city resident D Lorma D.

Goodwin by the honorary designation of Northwest Street located between Church Circle and College Street as Dean Lorma D.

Goodwin way.

So moved.

Alderman Smith Brown, is there a motion to adopt R52?

I so move.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Second second.

Thank you, Alderman Chandelmeyer.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Miss City, I'm sorry.

Um I would entertain a motion to suspend the rules to move forward.

Uh thank you, Alderman.

Alderwoman O'Neill.

Is there a second?

Second.

Uh any discussion?

Well, just I think the it should be clear what the what we are suspending the rules to do.

That should be part of the motion.

To move directly to uh adopt uh R526 on second reader.

Thank you.

All right.

Any discussion?

Okay.

Uh before we move forward again.

I just want to thank um her husband, her daughter, her brother, and other family members for being here and community members for being supportive.

This is the moment where we're about to pass the resolution to honor uh D Goodwin.

Almost I have to do third reader too on second for resolution.

Suspend the vote.

Thank you.

Appreciate the clap.

All right.

All those in favor suspending the rules so we can get to what I meant.

I thought we were at say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Aye.

I'd entertain a motion on second reader to adopt R 526.

I'll move that.

Second.

Thank you, Alderman Smith Brown.

Is there a second?

Second.

All the any discussion.

What's that?

Can I have a roll call, please?

Yes, sir.

Mayor Littley.

Aye.

Alderman Shademyer.

Aye.

Alderwoman Conte.

Aye.

Alan Savage.

Aye.

Alderman Thorpe.

Aye.

Alderman Huntley.

Aye.

Alderwoman O'Neill.

Aye.

Alderman Smith Brown.

Aye.

Alderwoman Alsif Johnson.

Aye.

Thank you.

The motion carries.

Ms.

City Attorney, please call the next item on the agenda.

The next item on the agenda is resolution R626 authorizing itinerant merchant sales within the Annapolis Historic District for approved special events during calendar year 2026.

The purpose of authorizing hawker peddler and itinerant merchant sales in the historic district in conjunction with approved special events during the calendar year 2026.

Is there a motion to adopt R 626 on first reader?

Thank you, Alderwoman O'Neill.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, say nay.

I refer R626 to the finance committee.

Ms.

City Attorney, please present the next item on the agenda.

The next item on the agenda is legislative actions on second readers beginning with ordinance 04025, establishing a 12-month moratorium on new short-term rental licenses for the purpose of establishing a moratorium on the issuance of new licenses for short-term rentals for a period of 12 months from the effective date of this ordinance.

Is there a motion to adopt 04025 on second reading?

So moved.

Thank you, Alderwoman O'Neill.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

Are there any amendments?

Point of order, Mr.

Mayor.

Maybe just if I could offer, I think Alderman Huntley actually summarized well in his email as far as there's probably an order that might make the most sense to do these in if you entertain.

Sure.

I think it was uh five.

Just two.

Because that'll dictate some of the other amendments coming out that were that came out of economic matters and whether or not we even move them.

Uh I'll take them in order that uh whoever raises their hand first and wants to get started.

Alderman Huntley, does that mean that you want to get started?

Sure.

I'll I'll I'll move amendment five.

Second.

Okay.

Any discussion on amendment five?

Alderman, the sponsor wish to speak to it.

Uh yes.

Thank you, Ms.

Mayor.

Uh yes, this let me bring this up just to make sure I'm speaking the right thing.

So this uh yeah, so this just changes proposes to change it the moratorium from 12 months to six months.

And um the rationale is just that um uh you know I feel like we we did listen to and heard from the department uh in economic matters committee.

Um and I think a number of these items that are listed as action items coming from the moratorium are already things that are getting looked at uh in the annual report.

And so um this moratoriums I think are are very drastic measures that do have impacts on businesses, and so uh the interest is just to reduce it to six months in the effort of getting the results quicker to minimize that impact.

Okay, uh Alder Woman O'Neil.

Thank you very much, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, respectfully, the director requested 12 months.

Um when I originally wrote the uh legislation, um, we talked at length between six and twelve months.

Um while there are some overlaps, um you suggest protecting the business um interest.

Um this really protects the resident interest.

Uh I believe that giving the department the time to truly um research and study all of the aspects of the moratorium so that when they do come and give us a report, um it has as much detail as we need to actually make decisions based on if we're making any changes to how the legislation is written.

Um because I know that there's a question about the um 60 days before the end of the time um having that report 60 days and if we reduce the time down to six months, that's only giving them four months.

Um, and I just don't think, given the conversations I've had with the department, that four months is enough time for them to truly um bear into all of the details and all of the aspects that we're asking them to in the moratorium.

Thank you.

Alderman uh Huntley.

Uh I just this is sort of a point of information.

I just want to point out that this amendment also strikes the requirement for the report to be delivered 60 days beforehand.

So auto remind I think they would get six months, not not four months.

Um, and that the reason that I support this is that puts us right at beginning of September, end of August, which is when we get our annual short-term rental report anyway.

So the timing to me seems to make more sense to go with six months because again that's when we already get this report anyway.

Anyone else wish to speak on this?

Alderman uh Shannelbyer.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I believe our department has made quite the compelling case on why the extra time is needed.

Government reporting being what it takes, assembling stakeholders takes a significant amount of time.

Twelve months gives them that extra padding.

It may very well be a little too much time.

I actually do think it might be a little too much.

But if we don't give them that extra padding, knowing the speed in which government can operate, we may end up getting an inferior product.

I think that this extra amount of time allows us to really come together, really consider how we can benefit the work that we've already done and strengthen and enhance it in a way that benefits as many people as possible.

I understand where folks are coming from.

We don't want to just do this for the sake of doing it.

It's effectively, as it's been argued, uh the moratorium is uh legally considered a seizure.

We can't just do that willy-nilly, but by giving it that 12 months, we can really come up with a solid plan to move forward on this issue.

Thank you, Alderman Thorpe.

I would just like to quickly associate myself with Alderman Shannemeyer's point.

Um Director Kubiak has has spoken.

He's asked for the complete 12 months.

This is a really important topic for the residents of Annapolis, and I'll speak specifically for the residents of Eastport.

We need to deliberately move forward and come forward with a with a recommendation as to move forward that everybody can settle on.

We're done.

And that's what 12 months gets us.

Thank you.

I take this opportunity to share my support for what Alderman Shannemeyer, Alderman Thorpe, and Alderwoman O'Neill just said the if taken in a vacuum, 12 months might seem like a long time to address this, but of course the director doesn't have just this to address.

He's uh reorganizing AI PPC.

He's gonna help pass a budget.

He's ensuring that permits get processed uh well.

He's ensuring water access uh plans and programs continue.

He's ensuring that we speed up the process for permits.

He's um being responsive to needs for housing, working with the housing authority uh as they need uh assistance.

There are many, many obligations for the director of planning and zoning, it's a full workload, and we are now asking him to take time aside from all of the regular work to also take the effort to get community input, get city council input, and come up with a comprehensive plan to discuss this nagging issue that we've all been hearing a lot about.

And so I would like to give him the full 12 months to your point, Alderman Shandemeyer.

He might not need uh the full 12 months, and he's assured us that if he needs less time than that, then that's he'll get us uh the answer sooner than that.

If it's eight months, ten months, eleven months, whatever it is.

So I trust our um our directors to have a good assessment of their workload and the time needed to get things done.

So I defer to uh director Jacobiak on the length of the time needed.

So I'll be supporting uh voting this down.

Any other discussion?

Okay.

All those in favor of amendment five to support the reduction from 12 months to six months and striking the no later than 60 days, say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed say no.

Thank no.

The motion does not carry.

Okay.

Uh what council member would like to present the next amendment?

I'll move amendment one.

Thank you, Alderman.

And you want to introduce one in one A or help help us.

Now one A one and then uh amendment two, but if one A is necessary to go on the order, uh that's fine.

Thank you.

So go ahead.

So I want to move.

I'm sorry, so make the motion first, and then we'll get back to the move amendment one, uh, which is establishing detailed requirements for proof of residency and ownership requirements.

Is there a second for amendment one?

Second.

Thank you.

There's a second, is there a discussion?

Second.

What's that?

Second.

Thank you.

Um, would you like to begin discussion, please?

Sure.

Well, it's very direct.

Um using the state definition, which uh a lot of this legislation was actually mirrored from uh and this is the Maryland Code regs, source documents for proof of age, name, identity, residence, social security number, and lawful status or temporary lawful status.

So the documents that were provided here on this listing of categories is taken from both that um Mail and Code Regs as well as the Anorn County Public School system, uh, the residency requirements that they uh have provided to us.

Uh residing primarily is also a state definition.

Uh when we say six months, it's not very specific.

Uh but when you say um or more than six months, uh that's 50% of the calendar year, and that's 183 days.

That's more than six months, or 184 days in a leap year for clarification.

Um, and that's the bulk of this amendment.

Uh it's very specific to uh with the categories that's sharing what needs to be required uh for documentation.

Um, and I think this is really important that we lay this out.

It's a moratorium, and so I think um having a thorough listing of documentation uh gives us the meaning of what this is a little bit of a halt uh to uh new short-term rentals.

Thank you.

Would anyone else like to speak?

Alderman Shannon, Alderman Savage.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh, in economic matters, we ended up supporting one A over one.

Uh they both do pretty much the exact same thing.

Um really noble pursuit.

Why we ended up going forward with one A is it was slightly more flexible, uh establishing two forms of identification instead of three as the residency requirement.

Okay that said, that's really the only difference.

Uh both of these do effectively that loosening of it, so it's just what is your flavor of ice cream.

Okay, thank you.

Just for point of order, we'll be uh voting on amendment one and then depend, and then we'll we could take up one A, depending on how that goes, it may or may be may or may not be moved at that point.

Um said Alderman Savage and Alderman Hunley.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Yeah.

So um yeah, I I entirely support the intent because we both chatted about the concern with the legisl with the language in the legislation as introduced, which relies almost well, it relies too much on driver's license, and some folks don't have driver's license, many uh in the city.

And so that was I think I believe the the intent of Alderman Smith Brown is to um provide more clarity that doesn't just rely on driver's license.

When I was looking through it, I I um I felt that there were well two concerns I had with one, which is why I put together one A.

Uh the first concern is that I felt like everything listed was a bit too burdensome to prove.

Um I just think it's gonna be an impact to staff.

Uh and so that's why one A just really just simplifies it to be more general with the documents that it refers to because the one it doesn't the one potential issue is that it refers to uh a valid unexpired common access card issued by the US military, but I wanted to word it general more generally so that anybody, so if you're a reservist, if you're National Guard, um any kind of federal you know issued ID that it'll qualify.

Uh I want to make sure that we don't unintentionally, you know, um put ourselves on a corner by having too restrictive and too detailed information.

The second issue I had was concerned to say is just that it has two conflicting uh standards for residency length in the one area it mentions the 183 days or 184 days.

Um and that's where it says that's not necessarily consecutive, that says equates to 183 days or 10484 days.

That's different from the standard used later, which is six months, at least six months.

And so I was proposing trying to simplify that again with one A just by by just going with the six-month um standard, which is I believe what we currently use in the code for short-term rentals, if I'm not mistaken.

But uh in any case, that I again I support the intent.

I'm just trying to simplify it.

Thank you.

Alderman Hutler.

Yeah, so uh as has been said pretty unanimously, I I support the intent of both of these.

My tiebreakers do staff have a preference between I support the intent of both of these.

My tiebreaker is do staff have a preference between one or one.

We heard from the director.

Yes.

Uh Director uh Buckland, please identify yourself.

Yeah, um acting city manager um Victoria Buckland.

Um, yes, my understanding is that the staff preferences for one over one A.

I believe uh Ms.

John, yeah.

Um Mr.

Manassas, would you care to uh come forward if you have an opinion to share about Director Jacobiak to reinforce what Ms.

Buckland said or anything?

No, I would remove Ms.

Buckman.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, anything else?

All right, I just um I'm supporting one Alderman Smith Brown's uh point.

I I appreciate that there's not a huge discrepancy, but I think the difference between resident and non-resident is important, and so the specific detail that you've uh outlined here, Alderman's Smith Brown is uh my preferred way to move forward.

So I'll be supporting your amendment.

Mr.

Mayor, I'm sorry.

Yes, I'm sorry.

Okay.

I just want to point out that the common access card does not have an address on it.

Thank you for pointing that out.

Yep.

Uh Alderman Smith uh Savage?

Yeah, well just to clarify one A does deal with that.

It says uh valid military service, uh military identification and documentation of assigned residents.

Okay.

Any further discussion on amendment one, the motion to adopt amendment one?

Alderman Schenelmeyer.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

This is just a point of order question.

Um so if amendment one were to hypothetically pass, would we not move forward on one A?

And if Amendment one were to hypothetically fail, would we move forward on one A?

I in either scenario I would leave it to the author of the uh amendment to decide how he would like to proceed.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

All those in favor of adopting amendment one to O 4025, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed say nay.

Okay, the motion carries.

And Alderman Savage, would you care to uh just let us know are you what do you want to do with one A?

I it's no use moving it.

Yeah, okay.

Very good.

Thank you.

All right.

Um if no one else has a I don't see anyone raising the hand, I'll ask Alderman Smith Brown to address amendment two.

Sure.

I move amendment two, uh, which is an interim report from the city manager and a final report six days before the moratorium on new non-owner occupied short-term rental license.

And it's uh what this is, it's it's very straightforward as well.

It's just adding a piece here for an interim briefing.

Uh we appreciate uh the no later than 60 days prior to the expiration of the moratorium, and just adding the six-month piece here gives us a halfway point where we can just decide on how this moratorium is going, whether or not uh to the point of is this moratorium working for us?

We'll have data and information uh to be able to make further choices or decisions on the matter.

So I do move for this amendment.

Okay, can you make um let me hear the motion?

Yes, I move amendment two.

Second, thank you.

Um recognizing the motion uh by Alderman Smith Brown and the second uh open to for discussion.

I think you've kind of already started the discussion, so I'll go to Alderman Savage and Alderman Huntley.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh yeah, so I you know since the council's uh kind of move forward with decided to move forward with the 12 months.

I I don't I don't I mean I guess I can see where this kind of is in line with my original intent to to push for six months, but I I don't I'm not really inclined to support this because I I just think this is gonna take up extra staff time, and I think the intention with the 12 month is that there isn't not an expectation, but uh opportunity for staff to potentially finish before 12 months.

And so I'd rather just have them focus on that and getting that us the information as fast as they can instead of having to give a I don't know what we would do with the interim report, even if when we get it would be use that to I don't know shift them in a different direction.

I I just I just don't uh quite support it right now.

Thank you.

Alderman Huntley, then uh Alder Woman O'Neill.

Uh uh so a comment on a question.

The comment is to me when when Alder Smith Brown first described this to me, I was opposed to it because he said a report, and that sounded like a lot of work.

And when I read it and it's a briefing, or maybe he corrected me and told me it's a briefing, that seems more reasonable to me.

Uh less lower burden.

But same question before, do we have a staff recommendation on this?

Yeah, the the recommendation, the preference of staff is um that this amendment go forward.

Okay.

Umil and then Alderman Chandlemai.

Thank you.

Um, one of the things that um I discussed with the director when I was asking him about whether he um what he thought about different amendments, one of the things that he indicated was that this briefing um, you know, approximately two months before the end of um the moratorium would allow the council to hear what they're finding and possibly start making legislative moves um so that at the end of the moratorium we could have legislation ready to go if we found through the briefing that there were significant changes to be made to the current legislation.

Um so that was one of the reasons why giving that briefing gives an opportunity for the director to come before us and talk about findings so far, some suggested um using the city manager um also directions to go with new legislation so that at the end of the moratorium we're ready to act.

Thank you.

Yes, go ahead, clarifying question.

So is the intent with is one of the intentions of the moratorium to actually get at the end of the 12 months to get the actual policy, like recommend the legislation.

And so you're saying this would help us provide some I guess guidance if needed at that point on what we would like to get.

I guess worked on by staff as far as final recommendations.

Is that accurate?

I think so.

You've kind of faded out there.

I'm sorry, I need to stay closer.

Right.

Yes, please.

The thought is that at least from my point of view and from um many members of um ward two who have reached out to me.

Um they want some significant change in our current legislation.

And the moratorium is going to be a time for us to really do a deep dive into what our legislation currently looks like, but our policy currently says it can and can't do, who can and can't do those things.

And so the hope is that if we have a briefing and their findings are either for or against major policy change, then we have some months before the end of the moratorium to discuss and start preparing for that.

Does that answer your question?

Okay.

Anyone else wish to Alderman uh Shannelmeyer?

Thanks, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh economic matters had taken uh no stance on this because we were trying to be consistent with amendments that had passed out of the committee.

Uh wearing my Brooke Schandelmeyer hat though with further information that we were given by the director of planning and zoning, uh especially regarding amendment four.

They had said that they are able to collect this data monthly, so I feel like this report, considering they already collect this data monthly, is not that much extra work to comprise uh or to put together.

And I do want actual legislation and goals to come out of this moratorium.

For me, the worst thing that we could do is to just do this and nothing changes because that would just be pointless.

It would be a pointless action on behalf of this council to be performative.

Um we can do this, we can find out what we have on the books that's working, what do we have on the books that's needs a little bit of strengthening?

What do we have the books that was uh working very well?

So these monthly snapshots um that the department already collects can help us come up with this six-month midway point, and I personally would encourage my colleagues to support this.

I'm going to support this.

My answer's actually is aligned with Alderman Savage on let's just get the go right to the work and rather than add on to the uh workload of the director.

But since the director himself uh indicates a preference to support this, I'm going to do the same.

So that's where my vote will be.

Okay.

See no other request for discussion.

All those in favor of passing amendment number two, which requires an interim report and a final report.

Uh, say aye.

All right.

All those opposed.

Okay, here none.

The motion passes.

Okay.

Unless not seeing anyone, I'll ask Alderman Huntley, introduce Alderman.

I'm sorry, uh, amendment three.

Yes.

So one of my big concerns in reading through the base legislation was that it didn't acknowledge the existing code requiring an annual report on short-term rentals.

And I think Alderman Channelmeyer may think the the worst thing we could do with this moratorium is do a report and then do nothing with it.

I think an even worse thing would be if we end up with two reports.

So the goal of this really here is to say, since we already have uh since we're already getting an annual report every year, we don't want to get the report that's already mandated in code and get the report that would come out of this legislation.

So what I tried to do here is just align the requirements of the existing report with the requirements in this legislation.

And as such, I think it's important that we um I I actually think the annual report is more comprehensive, both in what it lists as requirements to be in there, but maybe even more importantly that it also says other information that the director deems appropriate to help the city council set policy.

So if our previous um if the way the underlying legislation is written does have some uh suggestion, if the it has some requirements for what the report that comes out of it has to say, this also leaves the door open for additional stuff.

But most importantly, what this amendment does is say we don't need two reports on short-term rentals to cover basically the same thing within one year.

But I realized I didn't get a second yet, did I?

Second motion.

Second, any discussion?

I'll take that as your discussion.

Sorry.

Any further discussion.

Alderman Chandelmeyer.

Uh I strongly agree with my colleague.

Um, I do think it is important to acknowledge the work that we have done on this issue.

Uh this is an issue that we have been tackling for years.

We took a significant step forward in addressing short-term rentals during the prior council and making sure that we're not pulling multiple different reports, make sure that our staff can actually focus on what matters, finding out what works in the code, what needs adjusted in the code.

Thank you.

We have a motion, a second, and uh two points of discussion.

Anyone wish to speak?

I I actually have a point of order on this, which is just uh it strikes a portion that we've just amended with amendment two, and I think that there's they're not actually in conflict, but as written, it's taking out part that amendment two relied on.

And so I just I I hope we can sort of all agree that city staff can harmonize those uh those two things because there's no there's no policy issue, it's just they're the words can have to get words mic a little bit.

Appreciate the point of order, and I am relying on the city attorney to my left to speak up if she needs us to amend anything differently than what we are doing.

Alderman Savage, just to point the order on that one.

It may be helpful just to clarify that it's your intent not to conflict with the previous amendment.

Yes, thank you.

That is my intent.

Mr.

Manassas, we did would you like to speak to this amendment and to uh or Miss Buckland either one of you wish to share Director Jacobiak's preferences?

Just introduce yourself, please.

John Manassa, Chief of Code Enforcement Department of Planning Zona.

So my understanding, and and John I'll ask you to uh jump in where I miss state.

Um is that the um the general intent of the moratorium goes beyond the goes beyond the the data collection that currently exists um and I don't think necessarily that the existing reporting and the moratorium are in conflict with each other.

Um part of what I had heard from the committee was um that you're not necessarily married to the existing reporting timeline, um, and that that is one of the ways to to sort of harmonize um and not double up on the reporting.

Um but I think there's other language that's in here that speaks to intent uh that I think was um clarifying for the department, and John, I don't know if you agree with that characterization or not.

I agree that I think the annual report that we did before um previously that it's just gonna by nature evolve a little bit with the new things that we're looking at now and some of the new processes, all the amendments that are coming forward.

So I think there's a little bit of maring that needs to happen, but I think um creating a separate report was sort of um what I think you director Jacobiak was saying uh not he didn't quite support amendment three.

Is that correct?

Uh correct.

Right.

Alderman Hutton, do you were Alderman Hutton?

So uh first of all, I I think the idea it's not the issue is not that they're in conflict by any means.

The issue is that the report that we already get is actually more comprehensive than the report that's required in this legislation, and so they're duplicative.

It's uh to then diagram in which one circles almost entirely inside of the other, not two things clashing against each other.

And um I I get the idea that there is some language within the whereas that uh the way you said it was to set intent, but a a bunch of that we're then just pulling down, and B, I think more importantly, we shouldn't be if those really are the things we want to require, let's require them in the part that is binding rather than in the whereas.

So it if somebody wanted to offer an alternate amendment to put all of those parts from that whereas down into the requirements, I could see the benefit of that.

But I think the goal that was articulated by the city manager of making sure we're very clear about what we're asking out of the product of this moratorium, would not be so I I do not think that goal would be supported by voting down this amendment.

Okay, I'm I'm going to be again going along with the director's recommendation.

I don't think this is has a huge impact either way.

Um so it's not a uh huge issue for me, but I'm going to support Director Jacobiac on this.

Seeing no other request for motion um discussion, all those in favor of amendment number three, which would strike the uh indicated whereas clause and add a new section five, say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed say no.

No.

Um would you take a roll call, please?

I think you catch that.

Yes.

Um, Mayor Littman.

No.

Alderman Shandemeyer.

I Alderman Conte.

I Aldman Savage.

Aye.

Alderman Thorpe.

No.

Alderman Huntley.

Aye.

Aldwoman O'Neill.

No.

Alderman Smith Brown.

No.

Alderman, Alderman Alphonse.

Ah.

Okay, the motion passes.

One, two, three, four, five, five, two, four.

Uh amendment three passes.

Five four.

And then we have amendment three A.

Alderman Chandelmeyer, would you care to let us know the status of this?

Not relevant because we're not doing the six months.

Okay, very good.

Thank you.

Three A is moved.

Alderman Thorpe, would you like to present um make a motion for amendment four?

Yes, I'd like to move forward with amendment four, which would require uh the city manager to provide a monthly report to the city council on the number of licenses, registrations, and infractions for the previous month.

Okay, second.

Second, thank you.

Any discussion?

I'm sorry, Mr.

Mayor.

If I I'd like to amend the stated uh uh moat uh stated amendment as it is, in that several of my colleagues have asked me to change one of the whereas uh that specifically reads right now city staff will expend a significant amount of time proposing legislation to manage the number of short-term rentals.

They've asked me to not make a conclusion in my whereas is what's going to happen.

I would agree with that, and I would like to change will to might.

City staff might expend.

For purposes of expediency, I will take that as the underlying motion to be adopted with the word might instead of will on that whereas clause.

Thank you.

And that has been seconded.

Any discussion?

Would you like to start the discussion since it's your amendment?

Sure.

Uh so it has been uh a constant question how many short-term rentals do we actually have.

Uh it's been a discussion about what are registrations and and and quite frankly, how many infractions we have.

So I think we need to be moving towards data.

In my conversation with Director Jacobia, uh the first thing I did was ask them about this, and uh would be would we be putting any extra burden on him by creating this report?

His answer was I already collect that data, I already report that data, and quite frankly, if you require this, it will save me getting three or four phone calls from different council members asking me for the data.

I'll just supply it once.

So there is no added research, added data collection, and it quite frankly would make his life streamlined.

Thank you.

Uh Alderman Savage and Alderman Shannemeyer.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

So I'm not gonna argue this too much because the whereas clauses don't they just establish background, but it just uh the wording still just seems odd to me.

Um I don't understand why feel like it's necessary to put in here that I mean staff is gonna be working on this anyway.

I don't see why what it accomplishes by stating that they're gonna spend a significant amount of time um working on legislation.

That's it's implied.

Um but again that's just a warehouse clause.

But the number for number six, I do have some concerns about the data.

One, and I think you you've addressed this to a certain degree.

I you know, we we very well very well may request this anyway, but I still think it's I'd rather have staff focus on the underlying purpose of the moratorium.

We've given them a lot of tasks in that.

I don't see why we should give them this because I because one uh big question is like what are we gonna do with this?

Even if we get this data monthly, how is it gonna what are we gonna do with it?

Are we gonna I don't know somehow change the direction of the intent of the moratorium?

I'd rather get it at the end of 12 months to see trends to see uh to assess what kind of additional resources we might need and and presumably it'll probably be included in the interim report anyway.

I just I'm just wary about piling on with even more requirements.

Okay, did uh he already spoke.

Let me take a new comment and I'll go back to him.

Well, I'll I'll just say why I find it would find it helpful.

I already walk around and see these orange placards up from all the enforcement that our staff are doing, and so but like that's very anecdote, right?

And so I can tell my residents we are really cracking down on this, we are getting more enforcement against unlicensed ones.

I've seen six this week, but like I've seen six this week is a much less beneficial number than actually the director told us we have had 13 of these happen this month.

So uh I it's data as I think Alderman Thorpe is kind of already saying it's data that I'm already looking for, and this just gives me a better source of it.

Okay, Alderman uh Thorpe.

And I would just simply add it seeing it month after month gets us all on the common sheet of music.

So we're not trying to we're not debating how many there are.

That's a common basis, and then we can talk about their impact.

Okay.

Um City Manager Buckland or Mr.

Manassas care to share the thought of the department on this I don't see any difficulty in providing the numbers.

I don't see any difficulty in providing the numbers.

I think it's a pressing issue that's gonna come up a lot quicker than I think everybody really realizes.

So having it monthly is is a good presence of mind, I think, for everybody.

I don't have a problem with it.

Okay, thank you.

Any further discussion?

Alderman Shandemeyer.

Uh thank you, Ms.

Mayor.

So in economic matters, uh, we had made no recommendation, and we were a little, I don't want to say hostile, but we weren't sold on this at the time.

Uh, but I will add some background.

We had incomplete data.

We did not hear from a planning and zoning director.

Uh we heard from a staff member that this would be difficult to comply with.

We later heard from the planning and zoning director that this is actually something that is not difficult to comply with at all.

Uh it is data that they already have, and that this amendment would provide a solid specific date instead of the current ad hoc information that they provide.

Um so if I could go back in time in economic matters, I would have asked for a favorable recommendation on this, but timelines being what they are, uh, we ask for that now.

Appreciate that update.

Um, City Manager Buckland.

Yeah, I'll I'll just clarify that that was a concern that I had raised um that was mostly born out of a concern that um that we agreed on what constituted enforcement actions.

Um that was the hesitation and perhaps not sufficiently articulated, but I have also done um due diligence since, and it sounds like there's agreement about what that means.

So I think we're I think we're in a good place.

Thank you.

Um again, I my instinct is the same as yours, Alderman Savage of why we're creating this extra work by hearing what the department's preferences are again.

I'll be going along with what the department preferences on this, and Mr.

Manasseh, I apologize.

I was adding an S to your the pronunciation of your name.

I was corrected.

I apologize.

Anyone else?

Okay.

All those in favor of supporting amendment number four, which adds two whereas clauses and a new part six at the end, which requires a monthly report, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, say no?

No.

Okay, the motion passes.

Okay.

And then we have a six, and I'm gonna introduce mine as a separate amendment, I think.

All right.

Um Alderman Savage, do you still care to move amendment six, or you what's the status of that?

Yeah, I do.

Okay.

I didn't I didn't realize there was a six A.

Uh so there was a six A at the request of the law office last week, and it was approved last week, but it wasn't distributed last week.

And so I asked that it be printed out today and said you got printed.

I'm sorry, yes.

Um, no, that's right.

That's we talked about this one in committee.

Yeah, uh no, I no need to move amendment six, but I will move amendment six away.

Hold on a second.

You don't want to move amendment six?

No, it's six six a I think includes uh it just builds off of six, it just adds another pair, and another whereas, if I'm not mistaken.

I think they do very different things.

Unless I miss exponential if Alderman Savage doesn't want to move amendment six, I want to amend six.

You do, you say, all right.

So we'll make the motion, we'll have second discussion.

Uh I'd like to move amendment six.

Okay.

Is there a second?

Second.

Okay, any discussion?

Alderman Huntley, you want to start?

Yeah, so I'm not sure.

Uh to me, six A is is kind of a separate session.

It should almost be amendment seven.

I'm sorry, uh, can you speak clearly?

Yeah, to me, amendment six A is a separate discussion, it should almost be amendment seven.

I'd I'd like to just talk about amendment six rather than have it be compared.

Uh this this to me is so crucial because I think what it does is and it's really just addressing the warehouses.

But I think it talks about short-term rentals in a much more balanced way.

Um look, I I, as many in this body have heard, uh, have opined on the issues that they can have on communities, but I also think it's important that we can't just can't just throw every bogeyman at them and blame them for all everything.

Um not that this was blaming them for everything, but just to say we have to take a balanced approach and where there are real issues, let's address those real issues, but let's not uh let's not blame them for for public health or for equity.

These things that really I think are not directly caused by short-term rentals.

Uh, I also think this amendment makes sure we do a better job of a acknowledging work that the council has done previously, and B or maybe actually this is a C, sorry.

I think this is the most important point.

Amendment six in my mind lets this moratorium be unbiased.

It lets it be unbiased.

Thank you.

It lets it be something that staff are going forward doing research and figuring out do we need changes, do we not need changes?

Is this good for our communities?

Is this bad for our communities?

Realistically, it's somewhere in between, but it's not presupposing things for them.

I think amendment six is so crucial because it gives them the flexibility to go and do the research and bring us back information that we can then make decisions on rather than making the decisions and the opinions for us.

Okay, thank you.

Any other discussion?

Alderman Savage and Alderman Shandelmeyer.

So I'm just going back and forth here.

They amendment 6A has everything that six has in it.

It's uh Amendment 6A is designed and written as an amendment to six.

That's why you're seeing it like that.

And amendment six A, the blue is amendment six, and the green is the six A amendment.

Okay.

And that code is on the bottom of the page.

Okay.

All right.

So that's why you're seeing it that way.

All right, thank you.

Well, yeah, so thank you then, Alderman Huntley for doing six first.

Uh, just to build off some of your points.

I so what I wanted to make what I wanted to do with six were a couple things.

One was make it clear this only applies to uh non-owner occupied short-term rentals.

I think that's what sponsors have certainly uh indicated, and that's what is uh stated later on in the moratorium.

Um also as Alderman Huntley mentioned, just to change the language in the way or as is.

Again, I know they're not legally binding, but I think it's important because the uh the language makes a lot of as proposed in the underlying legislation, makes a lot of assumptions about short-term rentals having negative impacts.

And I think that the whole point of this moratorium is to make that assessment.

Uh it also some of the changes proposed just acknowledge that we have put in a lot of work.

I know some of us have including some of the sponsors uh on some legislation in the past.

Um we've this will be I think this will be the fourth piece of legislation we've well, not counting, I think some other previous moratoriums, but um the fourth major piece of legislation that we passed on short-term rentals in the past uh six, seven years.

And so I do feel like it's important to acknowledge um, but also to um to um make it clear that one of the reasons to get this additional information is to help us um in future budgets to address potential needs that we have for resources.

Uh and so the third thing this does, if you look at the la third to last whereas is it does propose to strike some of the existing items listed the A through E, and then the rationale behind that is because some of the items stricken are already required in the annual report that Alderman Huntley alluded to and and hence are already included in his uh amendment that passed, and so um, and then I try and also I removed it it stated that the that the department would hold public hearings and gather input from residents.

Just felt like this is not public hearings are gonna happen with the legislation that gets proposed.

We've had significant amount of public testimony on this, including on the moratorium.

I did not see the purpose and value in having public testimony that's not even going to be part of the record.

Um I think we should just wait until we get the recommendations and then present it to the public.

Um, and so that's why I proposed to strike those and add two new ones that tried to stick with the intent, uh, but focused on the desire on in the new A to look at new regulations as far as recommending drafting, reviewing, adopting regulations, uh, as well as make recommendations for uh short-term rental compliance program associated with the upcoming budget.

And so yeah, that's that's oh, and the other thing which um well, I guess that might be 6A, because I was asking the law office about the importance of um basically asking them for their analysis of the legislation as far as if we need to better make make the distinction between owner-occupied and non-owner occupied, they recommended that we provide more details justification for why this is restricted to owner-occupied, and so that's where I think six A includes the language that proposed from uh sorry that came from the law office as far as making this more legally sufficient.

Um so I will uh I will support both amendments.

That's it in a nutshell.

Okay, thank you.

Um Alderman Shadow Meyer.

Thanks, Mayor.

Uh so we were supportive of this in the economic matters committee, and the primary reasons for this is amendment six and by extension six A, because it just fulfills uh one of the legal requirements that was missing in the legislation as a whole with the whereas clause it focuses this it into doing into building on the successes that we have had in the past and into focusing meetings with stakeholders into something productive and not turning this into a bunch of people on both sides coming forward and yelling by having that framework set up, we can turn this into stakeholders come together and we can actually get something positive and productive and build on what we have and focus it into something that brings this moratorium into a good final product.

Thank you.

Okay.

I'm I'm going to to share my thoughts on it.

I think the I appreciate the intent behind this, and if you look at the motion, we have the motion has nine elements.

One through seven, I'm fine with and I would agree with, but eight and nine, I disagree with.

And I would not like to constrain what the department can do in terms of coming up with recommendations.

So I would I'm going to now make a motion to amend amendment six by striking points eight and nine.

And I'll ask for a second to that.

Second.

Thank you.

Any discussion on the yes, Alderman Savage?

Can you clarify what the points eight and nine are sure?

So on if you look at this from the beginning, yeah, we have one through the motion itself is points one through nine.

And so I am uh saying I could indicate consent that's one through seven, and my motion is to strike eight and nine.

You see that implemented on the printout, which um I just want to call out to Cynthia.

This is really helpful the way you do this to have the motion, Cynthia, and then the as implemented, so thank you for that.

Um use the tangent.

Um getting back to striking eight and nine is my motion.

If you see how that plays out on the uh as implemented, it undoes the strikeouts here on the where as it undoes the addition of A and B, and then on the last whereas it reverts to the original.

Mr.

Mayor, uh point of order.

Um lines 24 through 35 have already been struck on page two via amendment three.

And so I think the the amendment three already struck lines 24 through 35 on page two.

So I think the motion that you're the amendment that you're making, which I I would be supportive of, is uh it would not strike those.

It would or sorry, it would not unstrike those, right?

It would just prevent us, it would get rid of the insertion and get rid of all of bullet nine.

I appreciate the clarification.

Yeah, agree.

Any discussion on that, Alderman Thorpe.

Not on that, but on your point.

Are you amending six or six A?

Six.

So six, my motion is to strike paragraph eight and nine on motion six.

Thank you.

Second, thank you.

We that yeah, it's already seconded, but thank you.

Alderman Savage.

But I think let's see, I'm looking at an Alderman Yeah, so I don't know.

So to alter Alderman Huntley's point, the language is already stricken, these additions in number eight would actually I would think help provide clarity to the underlying legislation.

I don't see how these would conflict.

If you're if that's a finished thought, I'll ask Mr.

Manessa to uh to comment.

Um yeah, I mean I but just well just to uh reiterate on the public I don't know what your intent was was and on committee we talked about amending the language to allow for public comment but to have actually have public hearings I believe it was pointed out in the that per the code that can only happen before the city council and so it's an odd piece of language um to have in there so I think Alderman Huntley's already removes that um but I want to point that out for you because you mentioned that we would need some further clarity if you're intending to put that something back in regarding public test I was reacting to it's literally point eight says strike lines 24 through 35 and so that's the the whereas clause is A through I think it was E that gets stricken right but it's already stricken so A becomes just adding these two I mean I don't I guess I don't feel super strongly about needing to put in A and B since the other uh Alderman Huntley's amendment passed but just pointing out it's thank you it gets a little confusing with the multiple amendments Mr.

Manessa any comments from the uh from the department on amendment six or the proposed amendment I'm actually at a disadvantage on this one I I'd look at legislator this afternoon and it didn't when I tried to download the amendment six it said it wasn't available so I'm I'm really trying to follow the discussion Ms.

Roder do you have an extra copy thank you while you're looking at that um let me call let me ask Alderwoman O'Neill to speak um I would just like to say a point of order um when we were talking about amendment three we were really focused on the no later than you know striking the 60 day I don't think anybody really paid attention to the fact that we struck all of the reasons for the moratorium and that is conducting a comprehensive study of the impacts of the short term rentals the review and analysis of short term rental regulations adopted I mean I honestly I'm embarrassed to say that I didn't fight for it earlier when we were talking about amendment three because I was so focused on the fact that it really talks about the annual report in the amendment summary and it doesn't talk about eliminating all of the reasons for the moratorium so is that a motion to reinsert I think it what I'm hearing if I hear it right is that is a motion to reinsert on page two lines 24 through 35.

Point of order can we not have an amendment to an amendment to an amendment yeah we're only typically only have two can we ask for reconsideration there's there's a motion point of order there's an emotion on the floor yeah right may I may I make discussion on the motion that's on the floor so right right now we have the motion to amend yeah so uh I I just want to say I I said just now to you Mr.

Mayor that I would support it.

I actually think I would not because that would then go back to saying that a moratorium of 12 months is necessary and reasonable for the due consideration uh of assessment of recently adopted resolutions and in my opinion we do not need to wait 12 months to assess these things because we have already shown that we can address assess our short term rental regulations without having a moratorium so just want to tell you why I said I would support it and I'm not supporting it.

Got it.

Amendment six yeah the amendment we haven't brought up six a at all no the six a and then six but we haven't brought up six a yeah I thought right if I was talking about what we would say that no just so right now just for point of uh order we have amendment six by itself not six a and then my motion to amend to strike um point eight and nine any further discussion on my amendment to strike paragraph eight and nine from this okay um mr manasseh are you do you care to comment on my motion that's whether it's not mine but the the pending motion is to strike eight and nine from amendment six okay so the way I understand um that is the item a is to draft review and adopt further enhancements is that what is that I'm having more time hearing you uh in my understanding of what you're asking item a is to draft review and adopt further enhancements for I I'm not sure where you're a so we have amendment six before us um titled amendment six dash alderman savage and in that

Okay, so the way I understand um that is the item A is to draft review and adopt further enhancements.

Is that what is that?

I'm having more time hearing you.

Uh in my understanding of what you're asking, item A is to draft review and adopt further enhancements.

I'm not sure where you're A.

So we have amendment six before us, um titled amendment six dash alderman savage.

And in that motion on the first page, there's there's nine points.

One through nine.

Okay.

My my motion is to strike paragraphs eight and nine of that amendment.

Right, which given that the the strikeout portion was already approved in amendment three.

What he's reading is that point eight really is adding the the language, the two A and B, and that was what he was.

Ah, gotcha.

Thank you for that clarification.

Right.

So striking that A and B.

Now I'm with you.

Okay, you're striking A and B.

Yes.

Okay, no opinion.

Um on question eight.

On number nine?

Yes.

I think I would support that um that item.

It seems like a reasonable so you're supporting keeping nine in?

Yes.

Okay.

I'm gonna withdraw my motion.

Okay.

I'm gonna move to only strike eight.

Is there a second to that?

Move to strike eight.

Yes.

Meaning if the mayor just said eight and nine, and there was no position on eight, but there is an opposition to nine.

I'm moving just striking eight.

Is there a second?

Second.

Okay, any discussion on Alderman Huntley's motion to strike paragraph eight of amendment six.

I'm calling it amendment six beta.

And I'm not seeing any discussion.

All those in favor of Alderman Huntley's motion to strike paragraph eight from amendment six.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Those opposed.

Okay, motion carries.

Now we we're back to the underlying amendment six, now without paragraph eight.

Any further discussion?

Mr.

Manasseh, what's your the department's position on amendment six without paragraph eight?

Director Jacobiak uh indicated no on this one.

Thank you.

Any further discussion?

Alderman Huntley.

I'll I'll just say that amendment six to me is is kind of the whole ball game.

I think that whether amendment six passes or not is what's going to determine my support for the underlying legislation, because I feel like without amendment six, there are parts of this that are not there are parts of the warehouses that are not correct and accurate.

And I I personally won't put my name behind, I don't want to put my name behind those.

So I um I I asked my colleagues to support amendment six so that then I can vote for the underlying legislation.

Alderman Huntley, if I could ask for your clarification, if we if the council supports amendment six, will you be supporting the underlying legislation?

That's what I'm saying, yes.

Okay, thank you.

Any further discussion?

Alderman Savage, then Alderman Chanelbyer.

Uh I mean I I share my colleagues' sentiment because I I because again, one of the intentions with this amendment is to give respect to some of our previous efforts on this.

We've all worked very hard on the previous efforts, and I felt like we need to acknowledge that.

Um, but also keep things neutral as far as preserving the intention of this moratorium, which is to assess impacts and again not lead with assumptions.

So yeah, I I do share this.

So you're supporting okay Alderman Chandler Michael.

Uh while six is not my make or break point, I will say six does acknowledge the strengths and the successes that we have had in the past, helps us keep focused on how do we improve them and to find the things that need to be tweaked and find the things that are working, and how do we streamline what is going well and fix what is not going well?

Okay.

Anyone else?

Alderman uh Smith Brown.

So yes, uh, with amendment six.

Can you speak up, please?

Yes, with amendment six we have here significant and monumental.

Um I would would ask is is this truly monumental?

Because if not, I think that I would move that we strike and monumental, and I will most likely support the amendment.

Can you I think you're referring to a portion?

Can you make direct us all to where you're seeing the word monumental?

Whereas oh 1425 was significant and monumental.

Got it.

Thank you.

And so that is just taking it back to the paragraphs on the first page.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Uh so that is what I'm hearing is a motion to amend amendment six, paragraph four, to strike the words and monumental.

Is that your motion?

Yes.

Okay.

Is there a second?

The second, I would accept that as a friendly amendment.

I would accept that as a friendly amendment.

Okay.

Any discussion?

Alderman Thorpe?

I think we need to take a step back and realize what we're hearing here.

Is there's concern in the whereas that tie the hands of planning and zoning.

And I think if we all agree that we're not going to in 12 months say to the director, wait a minute, the third whereas says that the legislation that was passed in 2025 did this, you can't do that.

I I think we all as legislators can agree that I would I would totally agree with Alderman Smith Brown on this, but I could I I'm probably gonna vote against this because I think it takes it the other direction where we're if we're trying to be neutral here, let's be neutral.

And and and I fully respect all the work that has gone on over the last year, numerous years on short-term rental.

But let's not tie the hands of the director of planning and zoning as we ask him to do this study.

So I'm probably gonna vote against it.

It's not something I'm gonna lie in front of the railroad tracks on, and I would ask the group that to do a head nod that we are not going to in a year say the third whereas on the the sixth amendment says this, you can't do that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Alderman Savage.

Just so I mean I think a couple things.

One, and nobody's trying to tie anybody's hands with these.

These are where as clauses, they do not have substantive legal impact, right?

They but they do establish intent.

And I think you would hear from a number of us that we're trying to get to a point to say yes to this, and all we're asking for is some acknowledgement and tweaking to moderate the language a bit to kind of acknowledge and hear some of the the efforts that we've made in the past to get us to that point.

And so uh I again I don't think this is something which is uh we're not trying to change the uh hereby established, which is really where the meat of the ordinance is.

Um I I think it's just uh it's uh it's a simple request to try to get some unity.

Okay.

Let's vote on the uh Alderman Smith Brown amendment of take striking the words and monumental.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye, aye.

All those against Alderman Huntley's heard the motion carries.

And I think we're ready for a vote on amendment six as amended to remove the and monumental and to remove paragraph eight.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

No.

Okay, the motion carries.

Alderman amendment six is passed, amended.

Okay.

I'm going to introduce six A as its own standalone amendment.

It's to add a whereas clause which you have in front of you.

So move.

Thank you.

Um for discussion.

I would this is just being offered as at the advice of the law office to add further uh support and evidence for the differential of how we're treating um owner occupied differently than non-owner occupied.

Any additional conversation, Alderman Chandelmeyer?

Uh, one I guess policy to add to this uh point, and then one procedural question.

One uh policy point to add.

This came at the recommendation of the law office.

It is absolutely essential that we add this for the moratorium uh to pass legal muster, because as stated, a moratorium is considered a seizure.

And if we are to legally distinct, we are if we are to put a distinction between owner-occupied and non-owner occupied seizures, uh, we have to strengthen that in the whereas causes.

Uh so I would encourage my colleagues to support this.

Uh my procedural question is if we support this, do we have to go all the way back through what we just did for six, or is it literally just adding that whereas?

It would just be where adding this whereas the new fifth warehouse clause.

Beautiful.

I highly encourage even more for my colleagues to support this.

Thank you, Alderman Hutler.

I'm not gonna try making a uh amendment to this to to fix the issue that I have.

I think it's going to just pass.

But I want to register why I oppose this, even though I appreciate the effort to the law office.

I think it gets us back to the some of the same issues that I had that I think we fixed in amendment six.

So that short-term rentals have problems, but we can't ascribe every problem to them.

I don't see how we could possibly think that a non-owner occupied short-term rental where someone is not there could be worse for parking than an owner occupied rental where the owner and the visitor are both there.

It doesn't make any sense to me.

So I again I'm I'm not gonna hold us all up over it, but I don't think some of the things in this are accurate.

So I'm gonna vote against it.

Thank you.

All those in favor uh amendment, did I call this amendment seven?

I think I called this amendment seven.

I intended to.

What's that?

Six A?

All right, so I guess I'm calling it six A.

Um, to Alderman Savage's point, it's the danger of uh doing business at 9 30 at night.

All those in favor of 6a say aye.

Any opposed?

No.

Sorry.

Thank you.

The uh motion passes.

Any other motions?

Okay.

All those go ahead, Alderman Thorpe.

Mr.

Mayor, before we vote, I'd like to point something out that's happened tonight.

And I watched it happen for a year when I was sitting out in those seats or online.

We have been debating for the last half hour on this piece of paper, which the public has no access to.

And I think we should take a long-term view of this and figure out how to create enthusiastic democracy using technology we have, whether it's the screens or online or whatever.

But but I I'm embarrassed to be part of a discussion that we're having here, pointing to paper.

And I'd like to see us move in a direction where when we for all the right reasons, propose amendments that cause a paper to be distributed amongst us, that the public who's here at 9 30 at night as well, have an opportunity uh to look at it and can follow on.

I'm not asking for a response now, it's it's just a point that I'd like to make.

Thank you.

Alderman Thorpe, I would just direct you if the anyone member of the public or anyone in the world goes to Annapolis.gov, goes to the legislation page, and they could type in 040 25, which is what I did earlier today, and there's a hyperlink for all of the amendments.

Um earlier this afternoon, 6A was the only one that was not there, and that's why I asked for that 6A to be printed for all of us.

But it's been refreshed and updated, and even 6A is on the website as well.

So anybody could have could access now or later.

So I I didn't know that.

That's tremendous, and that that that actually accomplishes what I'm looking for.

We should probably make that more known as we distribute the paper and as we introduce that.

We probably want to highlight to people, especially viewing from home where they can refresh their computer or whatever.

But I I commend you for taking that action because it was not when I was sitting out there for a year.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Alderman Shannemeyer.

Um I'm gonna actually correct the record.

It has been like that since I have been on the city council since uh 2020.

Okay.

Any other discussion, Alderman Smith Brown?

Sure, I I think it would be great though.

Um I've seen in meetings where amendments are done.

I know it'll take a little extra staff time or what have you, but if we did display uh the legislation or even the amendments that we're discussing on the screen, I think that would be helpful, especially for those in the audience who don't have paper copies and for virtual.

Um and even if we can do live updates, I mean these types of things we can look at long term and in light of our staff.

We want to make sure that we're cognizant of the time they spend, but that would be extremely helpful in support.

I appreciate the the intent by that.

I would imagine it's difficult would be difficult to physically accomplish that, but I would uh take your point and ask our um media team to consider if that might be something to accommodate in some fashion.

But I just I know the mechanics as we're flipping back and forth.

It's hard for the public, but I get that.

Okay.

Okay.

Um, Alderwoman O'Neill, do you want to make a uh motion to reinsert those lines that were removed?

Yes, I would like to make a motion to reinsert.

If I could if you don't mind me helping you, I think it's uh on page two of the underlying motion, it's to reinsert lines 24 through 20 through 35.

Correct, thank you.

Lines 23.

Oh, sorry, 22 through 35.

And I picked that up from amendment six, uh, paragraph eight to help uh refine where that was.

I'll second that.

Thank you.

Um Alderwoman O'Neill's motion has been seconded by Alderman Smith Brown.

Um I still think I saw Savage and then Alderman Savage and then Alderman uh Huntley.

So yeah, so again, I would just ask that that public hearing be changed to public comment.

We were told, I believe it was economic matters that per the code public hearings require that it has to be done before the council, and I just don't see the value.

This the whole point of getting public comment would be to help help give staff input a feel of the public, and doing that before this body is just I don't I I just think it's best to wait till we actually get the legislation for us to to be hearing that because we don't have any uh control over ultimately um what the staff ends up recommending.

So I I would just ask that get that get swapped out hearing for comment.

I would point out that public hearing is lowercase, so it doesn't have a such a specific uh definition of it has to be a city council public hearing, it could be a a gathering that the department holds, it could be a city council public hearing, but it's a it's a public forum of sunset, it's a lower case.

What I mean that's I guess I'd like the law office opinion on that, but it sounds like if that's your intent, I don't see why not just change it to comment because you would still accomplish the same thing without having to argue about if it's capital or not.

You're right, I don't feel significantly between public comment, it's just public comment.

Um you're right, I don't feel strongly between public hearing and public comment.

I think hearing is a broader term, and so it would allow a opportunity for the department to present something and invite the public to provide comments.

Yeah.

Um I I think I'll add Alderman Huntley and then Alderwoman O'Neill.

Yeah, I I think it would not be good to add this back in for all the reasons that we already took it up.

Uh, which is to say we would be once again requiring a second report, which I think would be silly, right?

Like we already said once we don't need to say conduct a comprehensive study and then have a code of report in code.

So uh I in my all I can say is if you voted for amendment three, I think you should vote against us.

Alderman O'Neill.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um I don't I think this is the um as the sponsor of this legislation, this is the meat of it.

This is the purpose of the moratorium, conducting the comprehensive study, review and analyzing the regulations um by that other people have used, um, evaluating and holding public hearings, public hearings happen in planning and zoning uh commission on boards and commissions all the time.

So I don't think I'm not gonna fall on the stake over public hearing versus public comment, but there are public hearings that take place in the city.

Um by taking an like I said, I will shamefully admit that in amendment three, I was more focused on the report versus the actual removal of these, and I think that that's two separate things.

I think you're removing the meat of the reason for the moratorium.

Thank you.

Alderman Smith Brown.

Oh, I didn't have anything to say on that.

Oh, I'm sorry, I missed all.

Um before I go back to Huntley.

Alderman Huntley, is there anything else?

Um Mr.

Manassa, do you care to have voice any department comment on this?

At this point, no, I don't.

Okay.

Um before I go to you, uh Alderman Huntley, I just want to uh echo and adopt the thoughts expressed by Alderwoman O'Neill.

Um I don't see anything in these uh A through E that's hostile to the work that has been done by previous councils or that presupposes a um a decision.

So I support uh reinserting A through A.

Alderman Huntley.

Well, that's exactly what my comment was gonna be about.

To suggest that the purpose of the moratorium is to adopt new regulations, very much which is what it says, right?

The purpose of this moratorium, skip over a bunch.

It's to adopt comprehensive short-term rental regulations.

I think we we all I feel like we we agreed in previous ones that we did not want to tell staff that we we know the results of this moratorium already.

We should not be saying the purpose of this is so that we can put more stuff in place if the whole idea of the moratorium is to figure out whether we need to put more stuff in place or not.

So uh no, I I think it I would I would strongly disagree with what you just said.

Okay.

Um I think I saw a hand here first, then come back here.

Alderman Savage, then Mr.

Mayor Smith Brown.

Yeah, I just again I reiterate, I just feel like it also is just redundant.

Um things that are already a lot of these are already required with the annual report, but I guess I would since we're asking staff there how they're gonna vote on all of these amendments.

I I would like to look towards the office of law and find out like do you have concerns about how this is when it says whole public hearings?

Because again, typically, yes, that's that's something that's done by bodies that we create, boards, commissions often it's it's typically uh quasi judicial bodies.

Um I don't this doesn't create a body.

This is something to be done by staff.

So how is staff gonna conduct public hearings?

I I just feel like it's much more appropriate, like they typically do for permits and other initiatives is just accepting public comment.

I think we did something similar with the um uh some of our other previous task force.

So I guess that's my question.

Do you law office of law?

Do you feel that this should get tweaked at all?

Or does this cause any concerns as far as how it's written the way that it's written, it is not capitalized, so it's a general public hearing.

It doesn't make it a specific public hearing, but the office of law can look at it again in more detail if you would like that.

Alderman Shen.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Alderman Shenamayer.

Thanks, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh so we had heard different in economic matters.

Um I'm gonna go ahead and believe the city attorney here.

Um, but is there how do we clarify that?

I'm apologize if that's a goofy question.

Are is us saying it here in this council meeting sufficient for legal purposes that that is what public hearing in the lower case means?

I would I would prefer not to answer it on the spot and bring it back to the opposite law to look at.

All right, cool.

Um Alderman Smith Brown, then Albertman Huntley.

So I had two points.

The first uh I would ask uh Mayor if I can ask Alderman Huntley to clarify what he meant about the um I think it was the second point he made and why we should not support this.

It was some language that he he referenced, and I would like to see where that is in the legislation.

Do you recall it all?

Yeah, okay.

May I, Mr.

Mayor?

Uh yes.

Thank you.

Uh my issue was saying that the purpose of the moratorium is to, and then I'm skipping down to E, adopt comprehensive short-term rental regulations.

And and my point is we we should not be saying that the purpose of this thing, which we are ostensibly using to figure out whether or not we need more regulations, that the purpose is to adopt more regulations.

But um may I have the floor, Mr.

Mayor, or were you done?

No, so the second point was um Alderman O'Neill, who sponsored this legislation, uh put forth the purpose of this moratorium.

And so if we felt, or if someone else felt that the purpose of this moratorium should be different, then they could have sponsored legislation to say that.

But I believe if the sponsor of this legislation felt the need to include this, it must have been significant enough.

Uh so I just wanted to make that clear and confirm.

Thank you, Alderman.

Um Alderman Huntley.

With respect to my colleague, I contend that this motion is out of order.

I think it constitutes a reconsideration of amendment three, which would need to be made by someone who voted on the prevailing side of amendment three.

I'll uh defer to Office of Law and the ruling on that.

I mean, since we get points made, give her a second to read it.

Um Mr.

Mayor, guess Alderman Savage.

We might be able to get some clarity from the city.

Can you speak up?

We might be able to get some clarity from city clerk.

Uh we do code provision for motions to reconsider, and the alderman is correct, it has to be made by um the prevailing side to make that motion to reconsider.

The question is whether this is it constitutes a motion to reconsider.

And so that's oh, I see.

Yeah.

I see.

Okay.

I see you have an opinion on this.

Yeah.

We don't have an answer for you at this moment.

Well, I think that since the amendment, which I'll call amendment, what are we on?

Eight was seven, however, we want to call it, was explicitly described as being a portion of amendment three.

I think that lends credence to my point that this is out of order.

Care to say anything?

No.

Okay.

Uh we're gonna be in recess for five minutes.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh we're back on the record on our city council meeting.

My understanding.

Well, I'm just let the city attorney speak for herself.

Because um amendment three passed, um that the amendment three passed, and so a new amendment, which would be amendment seven can be introduced to include the language that um Alderman O'Neill is requesting.

Okay, and we have consensus between the city clerk and the office.

So I'm going to move forward as chair with the motion by Alderwoman O'Neill, Ald um Amendment 7 to re uh insert lines on page 22 through 36.

If I understood that, we've had a second, we've had discussion.

If there's any further discussion, Alderman Thorpe.

To clarify, so that's A through E.

Yes.

Thank you.

Yes, exactly.

Okay.

Um just I said the A quickly, yes, A through E on that whereas clause.

All right, all those in favor of amendment number Alderman Savage.

Just a quick request.

I I understand we're we're doing things on um, you know, last short notice here, but I would ask that we dig in a little more after this for future situations to make sure that's a good thing.

That's a great idea.

That's a great idea.

Thank you.

All those in favor of amendment number seven, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed say no?

No.

Motion passes.

And I think now we're ready for can we get a roll call?

Sure.

I just heard two, but that's fine.

Roll call.

Okay.

Um let's see.

This is number seven.

Um Alden, I mean, maybe let me shine my no.

No, okay.

Alderham Conte.

No.

Alma Savage.

No.

Alderman Thorpe.

Wait.

Alderman Woman Conte is no.

She said no.

Okay, she looks surprised.

So I thought she had no I can't hear you.

A no.

Okay.

Alderman Thorpe.

Yes.

Alderman Huntley.

No.

Aldwoman O'Neill.

Yes.

Alderman Smith Brown.

Yes.

Alderwoman Alph Johnson.

Yes.

Alderman Huntley, I apologize.

I didn't realize it was that close.

I would have called it wrong.

Yes.

Um, yeah.

It it passes.

Okay, motion passes.

Um, I think we're now ready for the underlying motion to pass 04025 as amended on second reader.

So moved.

Thank you.

Second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed say no.

So clarify it motion, please.

Yes.

Uh 040 25 as amended on second reader.

Okay.

Uh no.

Any other no's okay.

Uh the motion carries.

Um ask for a motion to pass 04025 on third reader.

So moved.

Thank you, Alderman Chandelmeyers.

Your second.

Second.

There's uh second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

I'm sorry.

Alderman Chandelmeyer, your head.

Um Savage, you had your hand up first before I got to the discussion on third reader, right?

I presume to be already exhausted a discussion, so uh forgive me for making that presentation.

Okay, go ahead.

Um so I I'm a little torn on this because I was trying to really get to a yes, but and I think I have a feeling how this bill's gonna go, so I'll just keep it brief.

But I I again think it's worth emphasizing that.

Um we've heard a lot of complaints over the years about short-term rentals, about the density of short-term rentals getting too high uh on some streets.

I feel like we've addressed that sufficiently with the cap and lottery and and what was 014 25.

Uh we heard complaints about short-term rentals as far as trash parking noise, uh, and we created a process for that back in 2013 for people to follow when um where SGR permits can actually get revoked.

And if my recollection is correct, I think staff was saying they really don't have they haven't received many complaints about short-term rentals over the years when we were digging into that in committee.

And so um I I don't think in light of all that, I just don't think that there's sufficient justification for such a drastic measure uh such as a moratorium.

Uh we've done it in the past before we didn't have any kind of short-term member regulations, but now that we do.

And now we've added additional staff.

I feel like we need to let both the legislation and staff work.

Um, and so I'm still not comfortable passing this.

Thank you.

Alderman uh Smith Brown.

Sure.

So I was going to ask who is it.

I'll hold off.

Okay.

Any other comment?

Alderman Chandelmeyer.

This final product represents a great deal of work, compromise, and thought that this council has put in as a body.

I highly encourage my colleagues to support it.

Thank you.

Not seeing any further discussion.

All those in favor.

Alderman's been done.

You may add my name as a co-sponsor to this.

Put too much work into that.

Thank you.

All those in favor of voting for in favor of 040 25 as amended on third reader.

Um I'll just move right to a roll call.

Thank you.

Um, Mayor Littman.

Aye.

Aldama Shandelmeyer.

Aye.

Alderman McConti.

Aye.

Alderman Savage.

No.

Alderman Thorpe.

Aye.

Alderman Huntley.

Aye.

Alderwoman O'Neill.

Aye.

Alderman Smith Brown.

Aye.

Alderwoman Although Johnson.

Ah.

Thank you.

The motion carries.

What's that?

81.

Yes, motion carries eight to one.

Madam City City Attorney, please call the next item on the agenda.

The next item on the agenda is resolution R326 water service agreement with North Point Property LLC for the purpose of authorizing a water service agreement providing for the extension of city water service to 1053 Chesapeake Harbor Road.

Also referred to as Feet Harbor Drive East, Annapolis, Maryland, owned by North Point Property LLC, and generally relating to the provision of said water service.

Is there a motion to adopt R 326 on second reader?

Thank you, Alderman Chandemyers.

Your second second.

Thank you.

Madam City Clerk, please call the law.

Yes, sir.

Mayor Littman.

Aye.

Albany Shandemeyer.

Aye.

Alderman McConti.

Aye.

Alma Savage.

Aye.

Aldman Thor.

Aye.

Alderman Huntley.

Aye.

Alderwoman O'Neill.

Aye.

Alderman Smith Brown.

Abstain.

Also Johnson.

I'm saying.

Abstain.

You did say abstain, correct?

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

Miss City Attorney, please present the next item on the agenda.

The next item on the agenda is ID 4626, a quarterly report from the housing authority of the city of Annapolis.

Thank you, Miss Maddox.

And anyone else here to present the housing authority quarterly report, please come forward.

Thank you.

Thank you for your patience.

And we are ready for your report.

Please I'd start with identifying uh who's at the table, please.

Good evening, council members and mayor.

I'm Melissa Maddox Evans, executive director, CEL of the Housing Authority, City of Annapolis, and with me today is uh one of our Hacker Commissioners, Ms.

Jackie Wells, also resident of Bloomsbury Square.

We're also glad to have uh with us today uh uh residents of Bloomsbury Square and leaders there, and also leaders of the Eastport uh community here with us today.

And so I hope that you have had the chance to review uh the presentation that I have forwarded to you.

And it was a great accomplishment on behalf of our partners, including the City of Annapolis, the namely the planning and zoning department, City Legal, the Comprehensive Planning Staff, and many other individuals, of course, along with our other community partners, our residents, the community action agency, and our development partners.

And so we are glad for that accomplishment, and we hope that we are awarded.

We expect to hear something maybe more towards the end of the summer or the fall with regards to whether or not we will receive an award.

And so rather than go through my presentation, since you all have had the opportunity to review, hopefully, I will just land on a particular slide which gives an overview of some of the main components.

And again, this is just an overview of our development plans for the Eastport Terrace Harbor House community.

So we intend to increase the density to from 357, 357 units to 722 units containing a baseline of 357 affordable units plus an additional number of units to reach that 722, which are all in the mixed income range, including homeownership.

And so the total estimated estimated costs of this type of development is about uh well over 300 million dollars.

The first phase, which will be about uh, we estimate for it to take about four phases, um, will be approximately 90 million, uh of which we estimate the cost to be.

And so one of the things that we plan to do uh with regards to um redevelopment is try to stage the uh Mr.

Mayor, can I ask a question?

Um would you prefer to need to hold questions until the end of the brief or ask as as we go slide to slide?

Ms.

Bannock Sevens, would you prefer questions during your brief or at the conclusion of your brief?

I'm not planning on speaking much further.

I was going to ask you all for So please why don't you finish then?

Okay.

So uh like I said, is a phase development with the goal to reduce and minimize the amount of relocation necessary for the current residents on this project, which is why the first area that is included in the phase is the area that is currently vacant land uh near well what is called a reference to be the baseball field in an open area and including um the HACA office buildings, which will be uh demolished in the first phase.

So we plan to build new units in that phase to minimize displacement on the site.

And so uh with that, I will uh pause and take any questions that you have.

Thank you for the presentation.

Alderman Thorpe.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um back to that first slide you briefed with the numbers on it.

Um 357 to 722.

Um where are we in the so first of all, let me thank you for your work because I think what you're doing here is probably gonna have the biggest impact on the city of Annapolis of a lot of efforts that we do.

So I cannot uh overstate the importance of what this is.

I mean, in 30 or 40 years, we'll be looking back at this, and this is our legacy, whether it's good or bad.

So thank you for all your effort.

Um the 357 to 722, where are we in the process of committing to 722?

Well, uh HACA, the city, the developers, and all uh engaged community stakeholders stakeholders are committed to creating 722 units for this development project.

So we are committed.

We certify that, and that's what we apply to HUD for.

A requirement of the choice neighborhood grant is to add a minimum double the number of units on site.

So uh this would enable us to do that.

So that that's pretty clear that we've got a way forward uh from an infrastructure basis and all that.

Um thank you.

So the second question uh applies to on that same slide, um potential uh the fifth bullet down, introduced retail health care, recreation, and other community amenities.

This is the mixed use uh effort.

And then if I could go down to the map two slides later, um maybe one more.

There you go.

Um so currently at Harbor House in Eastport Terrace, there's one pool, one ball field, and one rec center.

Is that that's right, right?

Correct.

And by my count in this plan, that's the same number in the future is one ball field, one recenter, and one pool.

Is that is that right?

In terms of a space that we project to be a playing field, there is one, but there are several green spaces in the new development.

There is one pool in the new development, one uh major community uh recreation center, however, we intend to build multiple multi-purpose spaces uh within the uh community center.

So it will be a bit different than how it is structured right now with several spaces to be used for stakeholders, uh partners in the community programming, and uh there will be sufficient space also for retail.

So currently the um the model for those recs that rec center pool and ball field is that they are there for the residents of Harbor House in Eastport Terrace.

There's a vision being discussed that would increase the recreation capability at what is now Harbor House in Eastport Terrace, such that it would break down the wall that currently is President Street and Boucher Avenue.

It where are we in the timeline for the residents, the city council, HACKA to work together to work on a vision that would break down those barriers so that the children that live on Boucher Avenue go across President Street more often to use those recreation?

Where are we in that timeline to be able to affect that?

So we started this process in 2021 with a comprehensive planning process, which is which was and still is a collaborative process.

This is not a HACKA redevelopment project only, right?

It was created and structured as a community redevelopment and revitalization project, which requires the input, investment, and the collaboration with uh local government uh for infrastructure, local businesses in terms of partnership and support, uh local programming, um, and of course uh a variety of housing types.

And so this is so to answer your question, we have already started that process as far as trying to break down natural uh community uh traditional community boundaries that have been in place because the collaborative nature of our planning process requires for all local community members to participate, neighbors, uh like I said, businesses, uh faith-based organizations.

And so uh so we've begun that process, and and that that's not something that we do later down the line.

It's actually part of the redevelopment and reenvisioning process for it to be a collaborative effort.

By the time we finish, this will not be a hack a project only, this will be a neighborhood redevelopment project, and that's how it's designed to be, and that's how actually it's going to be successful.

So I've been to your meetings and I applaud you for every one of the meetings I've been at, and so I I totally associate myself with with what you just said and your effort is, and that's wonderful that you're doing that.

And and Mr.

Mayor, I I guess what I would ask is some official city engagement and being the partner uh that I think uh Ms.

Maddox Evans is looking for that creates the vision for what this is in the future.

And I know that planning and zoning is engaged, but not but as we move forward, I do think it's a city council level effort to get into the discussion about exactly what Ms.

Maddox Evans was just talking about.

How does this development fit into the greater Annapolis in the future?

And I think we're I'm guessing based on your answer, we're about to be at the point where like 722 sounds like it's a number.

We're done with that.

So we're moving on forward.

I'd like to ensure that as we vision the future of this, that we as a council have the opportunity to vision something that is really profound that can make Annapolis better and break down those barriers that exist right now.

The uh previous city council passed a resolution of support for this effort.

The so I don't think there's you said formal earlier, so I think that was the formal um process for engaging in that.

There certainly is a lot of uh informal uh collaboration, and you alluded to a lot of it.

Uh certainly Director Chikubiak spends a lot of time and his staff spends a lot of time um working with uh director Maddox Evans, and uh I've also pledged that I intend to continue that support as well on behalf of uh uh the mayor's office at least.

And we've had a few engagements wherever whenever direct uh yes, director Maddox Evans has asked for something, I've done my best to accommodate to your.

I think what the larger point is, I don't think is is either those things.

I think it's just can we have some better collaboration or not better might be the wrong word, in ensuring that as we move forward we're working together publicly and in a way that uh constituents and this body can continue to coax engagement on where's recreation, where's transportation solutions?

So I don't think that's a formal process, but I think it is an important process.

Thank you.

Richard Alderman Chandelmeyer.

Thank you, Ms.

Mayor.

Uh, I am very excited for this project.

I think it has a bit of everything, mixed use, mixed income.

Uh, even the construction has prevailing wage, which uh my colleagues will roll their eyes at my love of.

But uh a few questions that I have is you mentioned that we applied for this grant to make this project move forward.

Um we've recently seen that grants are increasingly unpredictable from our friends in the federal government.

What happens if we don't get that?

What's our path forward?

That's a great question.

We plan to move forward with this redevelopment project with or without funding from the uh HUD CNI grant.

We hope to be funded because it will significantly help the uh the capital uh that is needed to accomplish the grant, but we intend to do this project regardless.

Go ahead.

I love it.

Um if we get closer and it's looking like that may be that grant may not be happening.

Um saying things you were already planning on doing, but I would love to get updates on what our backup plans for if that requires any adjustments.

And uh my second question is regarding the spa road site.

Um do we have any updates on the environmental studies for the potential carcinogens and the other uh health negative health uh chemicals, etc.

in that area?

We do not have uh uh that information at this time.

I know that the city is engaged, uh engaging in an environmental study, an in-depth one.

I believe they applied for a grant for those purposes.

So we determined that once we get the results of uh those studies, we would be able to better determine the viability of using the site for residential purposes.

All right, thank you so much for joining us tonight.

Alderman Smith Brown.

Yes, thank you.

And thank you too for joining us today.

Have some questions here.

Um the first is actually will you go back to the um site piece where it talks about the phases?

Yes, so it's actually uh less of a question, but it would be great if we can see here um the dates or the projected dates for each of these phases.

Um you only uh reference phase one, and it'd be great to see when phase one is being projected to to take place as well as the other phases so that uh we see expediency in the project being done with respect to development and the process of development.

Um alongside that uh be great to see the costs of each phase.

You say that c phase one costs 90 million dollars, and so we I think would all appreciate seeing the amounts across all four phases so that uh we can see how we're uh coming up with that uh 300 plus million dollar project as well as that um it'd be great to see you say 770 72 units uh our new units, um though is that accounting?

This is the question piece, is that accounting for the spa road site?

No.

Okay.

And so would the spa road site be necessary if we're looking to just only have to double the 365?

With the spa road site, there would have been the potential to go up to 900 units.

Is that necessary for the grant for the grant?

We informed HUD that we would be utilizing Spa Road as a possible site.

So we would question is is it required for the grant?

It's not required I do not support the spa road site.

I believe our people deserve better than that, even if it does come back uh with the assessment that it's healthy or what have you.

I think that we can look for other places for our people to be housed, especially if it's not required for the grant.

Alongside that, well, I'd like to clarify part of the grant purposes as far as requirements for the city participation is to invest uh whether it be financial and or land, it is the city that recommended the use of the spa road site.

We would more than welcome for the city to recommend other sites that it has in its portfolio for the purposes of this grant.

So there has to be and should be an investment of land in this project.

And if there is not, then that's another conversation that we need to have.

But this was the portion of land that the city had attested that was available for the site.

So I wanted to clarify as far as the investment.

Okay, so there needs to be an investment somewhere you're saying across the city.

Uh well, I would encourage us then as a city to look in other places for investment, and if you have any suggestions, please feel free to share those with us.

Um alongside that though, I was mentioning is it says units for ESPORC.

Um, please, if you can how many so you said up to 900, so are you saying 100 plus units at the spa road site or any other 200 or so units?

90-ish.

90-ish units.

Okay.

Um, how confident, I think was answered.

How confident are we in funding this without the CNI grant?

Where are we gonna make the money from?

So I have letters of intent uh from several uh equity investors that are ready to uh invest in Annapolis um MNT, Wells Fargo, Chase.

So uh we are we do not uh have hesitancy or worry about the interest uh in uh investors being interested in developing an Annapolis.

Wonderful.

Well, thank you for solidifying uh those commitments and giving more confidence that a project like this can be done to provide equitable and additional affordable housing uh for our residents.

Um so are you able to take those suggestions that were mentioned earlier and infuse them or incorporate them into this slide at all?

Would that be okay?

We can provide for you the information.

In fact, your staff does have the information.

They were uh they assisted us in an applying for the grant and in providing the information necessary to apply for the grant, and um also have information with regards to all of the financing, the proposed financing, the phasings for one through four, the number of units per phase, the projected investment necessary for each phase.

Um to answer your first question, uh in order to uh the grant requires that uh it be near or significantly near substantial completion in eight years.

So that is our timeline uh for uh the overall project, not phase one, phase one through four.

And so uh in each phase is on a project schedule.

Okay, I do I am familiar with us having the data.

I was just more so saying if we're given a slide about an overview of the project, it would be great to detail every piece of it if it's gonna be that comprehensive.

Sure.

I can give you the information.

This was a per for purposes of an overview of the project and where we are right now.

Um Alderman Smith Brown, uh, can you clarify something for me?

I you were concerned about the spa road site.

I'm assuming and looking for you to confirm your concern about the environmental contamination.

Yes, okay.

Um so on that point, Director Buckland.

My understanding is that contamination, if um Miss uh director, would you mind going to slide 11?

That shows the spa road site.

Thank you.

Um, assuming that if you'll bear with me to assume that this slide is in a correct orientation, the my understanding is the south side of Spa Road towards the Bates uh athletic field.

That's the side side of Spa Road that has a contamination, much less of an issue on the north side where the uh the salt dump is.

Is that correct or am I not correct?

I I believe that they did testing uh on both sides.

The their want the um set the side where that has Wien's Wayland um, because they were that all the area was studied together.

Um is the side in particular that had been discussed um uh as um as a potential site.

The the Brownfields grant, um, because remember we the council went ahead and and moved that parcel to the resilience authority um to enable funding for Brownfields grant.

Um and the intent there is that part of the remediation effort is the construction.

Um so those those things end up being related, right?

You don't do the remediation and then you build the the building as part of the remediation effort.

Right.

Um just as my commentary, uh Alderman Smith Brown.

I'm familiar with a similar area in Pittsburgh called Squirrel Hill that had a similar remediation, and now my mother lives there and part of a um thriving community.

That just my point is that you can do remediation very successfully.

It's a robust, uh very well-to-do community on in Squirrel Hill on top of a similar site that's part of a Brownsfield site.

So there's there's different levels of contamination and different levels of responses, and I certainly applaud your concern that we have an adequate level and appropriate level of uh remediation before.

But I'm um after 30 years of studying the issue from my background, it absolutely can be done correctly.

And Mr.

Mayor, we actually had during the Housing and Human Welfare Committee last council term, uh a builder come in and talk about all that went into uh Brownfield redevelopment and just the testing, the remediation process, just how much goes into it.

It's not just throwing some grass down on a nuclear dump uh and hoping for the best.

There's a lot that may uh that goes into the process that will hopefully subs uh subside your peers.

Yeah, and just the one other point I'll make is um uh director buckland pointed out as part of the construction, that's often the way it's done.

If you estimate the cost of in the ballpark of 10 million dollars, 10 million as its own project is it's a big hurdle to overcome.

10 million as part of a 350 million dollar project is easier to roll into the cost, just like whenever you buy a house, you roll into your transaction costs into the purchase, and so it's easier to uh make sure to generate the funds up front that way to do it.

So that's why it's so commonly associated with construction.

Um I think there were a couple other hands.

Um Alderman Huntley.

Thank you, Miss Wellison Director Evans for being here.

Thank you even more for staying here.

Thank you the most for building desperately needed housing in our city, and if there's ever anything this body can do to make it easier on you to build more housing to do a thousand instead of 700, please I want to hear it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Um Alderman, Alderwoman Um Conti.

Um, I just wanted to um X about the redevelop.

I know that we're talking a lot about the redevelopment, but I want to find out do you have any plans in place to help the residents now while you're waiting for the redevelopment?

It's a lot of stuff that's going on that we gonna wait three to five years before it's getting redeveloped.

So, what plans do you have in place to be able to help the residents while they're there?

So help the residents in what respect.

Just so I can as far as like conditions of like some of the places that they're living in.

Um we had somebody talk about the mold, and it's just a couple different issues, but um, do we have any type of plans in place while we're waiting for the redevelopment, which I think is a good idea.

wait three to five years before it's getting redeveloped so what plans do you have in place to be able to help the residents while they're there so help the residents in what respect just so I can as far as like conditions of like some of the the places that they're living in um we had somebody talk about the mold and it's just a couple different issues but um do we have any type of plans in place while we're waiting for the redevelopment which I think is a good idea but do we have any place while the people are waiting for the redevelopment to get the fresh start or whatever do we have anything that's going to be in place for them to get yes beneficial stuff now sure so we are continuing our capital uh repair uh and improvement program until the time that we are able to do a comprehensive redevelopment plan that entails utilizing the capital funds that we receive from HUD but unfortunately uh they are limited I was glad to learn that the city has recommitted to help fund uh 500 thousand dollars in capital repair funds for the HACA communities which will greatly assist us as uh to tie us over until such a time as the uh we are able to redevelop it redevelop we are utilizing funds from the state and we have utilized funds from the county for that uh purpose so you're right the units still need to be preserved and if there are issues such as mold or any other issue related to the unit they have to be addressed right now because we have families that uh live there and so we are we are continuing to address those items and we'll continue to do so uh until redevelopment thank you um George I have a couple questions um go back to uh slide 10 which was the um the colorful one one back one more back please that one the uh phase one cost is listed at 90 million that's obviously a relatively small portion of the 350 what do you what do you get for 90 million so we plan to demolish the hack up buildings and there will be uh as you see the pinkish structure is uh multifamily uh units uh where essentially where the office building is right now and so there will be new units along with um row houses that are the blue and uh the lighter blue darker blue or purple however your vision is um in that same phase and so it's housing uh that we plan to uh uh construct in the first phase so in that phase one 90 million how many um residents current residents are eliminated and how many uh new ones are created how many uh I didn't hear the first so the big plan is going from 365 to 72 what would those two numbers be just for phase one for 90 million um the first phase would be approximately a hundred and close to maybe a hundred and twenty ish units so taking down a hundred replacing with 120 there are no units being taken down in the first phase got it that's why it's a uh build first project which is why we wanted to build on the vacant uh part of the land and the land where the housing uh offices are so we could build new structures to move people in in the first phase to minimize displacement okay and of that 90 million how much do you have in hand committed not in hand but committed oh committed well we have letters of intent for the entire project okay and so uh cash in hand zero cash committed well by the city one million and by the state I believe one point five million okay um so but uh we have letters of commitment for the entire project okay and uh the timeline for phase one um I would say three years okay what do you need to have happen to be able to keep that schedule in big picture terms real big picture priority with regards to review and uh application application review uh those are referring to city reviews correct so any of the administrative reviews that are necessary for redevelopment which are several um uh they would need to be prioritized okay uh for us to be able to keep on on schedule and those are some of the things that we've been discussing with uh city staff have they been submitted to the city um in terms of plans when you say getting priority and efficient uh um reviews back and approvals have does the city have those applications in order to give you what you just asked for no not yet and so but we plan to begin that process uh

picture terms real big picture priority with regards to review and uh application application review uh those are referring to city reviews correct so any of the administrative reviews that are necessary for redevelopment which are several um uh they would need to be prioritized okay uh for us to be able to keep on on schedule and those are some of the things that we've been discussing with uh city staff have they been submitted to the city um in terms of plans when you say getting priority and efficient um reviews back and approvals had does the city have those applications in order to give you what you just asked for no not yet and so but we plan to begin that process uh this summer okay okay and at the same time we're doing this we're also applying for tax credits uh this spring and so there will be that's when the applications will be coming through as far as the various uh city uh approvals and requirements okay does your plan for spa road um need the south half for project because i think that there's lots of different proposals of proposed use for that um land and wondering if your spa road site envision can be just on the salt dome side i will have to check specifically what the south part means because we've been discussing it in the context of east versus west side i was just referring to that orientation of the slide that's all oh oh that's okay um so i'll I will have to get that answer to you okay to know exactly what portion you're referring to and then be able to be able to answer more specifically okay and I'm happy to have that continue that conversation another day but just to be fully transparent for the council anyone watching we have the city the city government itself has need of space especially when you consider the Gorman Street uh building uh at least runs out in 2030 so if the city is going to create its own space that's what I'm the the uh weems Whelan field side of Spa Road has been uh identified as a potential site for city government I'm not saying any just far from making any decision but if we're gonna get out of Gorman Street and consolidate that's a that's on the table at least.

Yes and that's something that has been discussed throughout the course of this uh redevelopment project right and so it's not clear to me is whether there's their compatible ideas and whether that works out so I'd I'd like to better understand so for purposes of if this is a choice uh project as far as spa roads inclusion uh the focus is uh not the focus but the goal is to increase housing as part of that there can be commercial space office space so that's the primary goal of HACA HUD all the other entities that does not mean there cannot be commercial space but the goal isn't commercial space per se but it is part of the mixed use benefit of doing a project like this so if you can envision us creating a community that is uh a work play uh work live play type communities that's the goal of what we're trying to do here so commercial residential recreation very good thank you um alderman Smith Brown and then Alderman Savage um I have two questions here the first is um if we have confirmation from these investors uh why are we not moving forward with this sooner and does that conflict us receiving money from investors conflict with the grant we are moving sooner I don't with the with the 90 million dollar you said the project is fully funded with the investors so I'm asking I said there are letters of intent and truly investment and in commitment so the way funding is structured for redevelopment projects there has to be different levels of commitment and approval and each investor commits based on commitments of other investors and so one of the first hurdles that we uh decided to engage in as far as securing the investments are securing tax credits for the property that is a major uh step once we secure tax credits the solidifying of those commitments begin to come to fruition uh applying for the choice neighborhood grant and hopefully we will be awarded uh being awarded that type of grant since it's a national grant it it uh it it sparks interest from other investors to solidify their commitment towards this project so for the next 18 months that's exactly what we're doing is solidifying those commitments uh with actual agreements for this project and so uh but that's what that's what you

Being awarded that type of grant, since it's a national grant, it it uh it sparks interest from other investors to solidify their commitment towards this project.

So for the next 18 months, that's exactly what we're doing is solidifying those commitments with actual agreements for this project.

And so uh, but that's what that's what you do with any redevelopment project, not just this one.

Uh that's what we're doing it at Robinwood, Bloomsbury Square currently, and now and lastly, Eastport Harbor House.

Okay.

Yeah, I ask only because the slide says that we're gonna move forward with the project without without the support of the CNI grant no matter what.

And so if you're saying we're gonna move forward no matter what, and the funding is solidified through these primary notes, if you will, of these, you know, hey, we're gonna invest in this project, it's just those kind of contradict them.

I just don't, it doesn't make sense to me.

But the other uh piece that I was gonna ask is out of these 365 uh units that we currently so 365 new units, how many units do we currently have in Harbor House Eastport?

357.

357.

Now, out of that 357, uh, which ones have been condemned or marked as unlivable due to the bed bugs in the mold?

Do you happen to have that number?

None.

None.

Okay, so condemned.

Okay, so condemnation comes through order of the city of Annapolis.

Okay.

So what has been done to remedy the issues of the bed bugs in the mold recently, especially with the case that I just saw?

I know many of us may have seen um the video of the bed bugs from the one resident's home.

What has been done to remedy that?

Sure.

So uh the next day when we found out there was bed bugs in the unit, we ordered uh testing of the whole building.

And so we engaged in uh a Termin X who brought dog sniffers who inspected all the units, and we're now engaged in a abatement program.

And so uh, and that's the protocol uh for whenever there is that type of issue.

So uh, but we addressed it and um and are currently still addressing it.

There's an initial treatment, then you have to come back two weeks later to check, and if necessary, treat again until the issue is fully abated.

Um Alderman Savage, then older woman also just mayor.

So for the 90 million, how much of that is the developer planning on putting forward so uh the majority of it um is the developer and uh the development team as far as securing the funding sources.

So um, well, could we get a breakdown of I'd like to see how much the developers contributing, and then you said notices of intent.

I think they could we get a breakdown of how much that and where does the CI grant fall into that?

And then factory in the city, kind of like we did with City Doc, break it all down so we can get a good understanding of that.

Okay, um as far as the remediation um yeah, so to the mayor's point, um I entirely agree as far as I think we want to personally I've always wanted to keep the door open.

I think we uh discussed this as the council last time, the door open for potential city use of some manner on on one of those sides.

Um but I do think just to keep in mind uh at some point, assuming we get the remediation money, we're going to have to come up with a plan, a development plan one way or another, be it C and I, be it city development or a combination of the two, because as you alluded to, the the remediation is dependent on the development process.

That's not always how it's done.

Sometimes you do remediate first and then do the development, but it is often cheaper, I think to your point to do it all at once.

Um but I will also just clarify you know, both sides do have pollution, uh including some of the open spaces that they tested.

Uh and although the east side, southeast, I suppose how you're looking at it, is uh does have the worst contamination.

That's why it has to be remediated to be used for some kind of residential use.

My recollection is what they said, even if it is used for some kind of office or mixed use, it still has to have some kind of remediation, perhaps not as much if it's if it's not all residential.

Um that also I think is to be determined.

Um but you know, all that said, I am I am also very excited about the mixed use mixed income proposal.

I do want to see some more details.

Um my top two concerns would probably be one infrastructure.

I think we really need to sit down and figure out is there going to be an impact on the schools and work with the school district to get through that?

We need to look at transportation.

Um doubling the units is going to have an impact unless we lead with some kind of transportation solution.

I'm not saying that should necessarily be all be burdened by the developer or the team, but the city needs to have a plan at the same time.

I don't think it's responsible to do that without a plan.

Um, you know, related to that, my other concern has to do with some of the design, uh, and that is also related to the transportation.

I think based on what we're seeing.

I would well, first of all, I'd love to see a map that has the color coded so we can look at it and see what the colors mean.

I know you went over some of it a few minutes ago, but if we get set that map, it'd be helpful.

But my concern is it's still a very auto-centric development.

You know, based on our own surveys of our bus system, 80% of people who use it don't have cars, and I'm assuming, and this is some of the information I think we need to get.

How many of the current residents and how many of the anticipated residents are going to be relying on public transportation?

And I think that needs to be built in to the design.

Uh again, I'm not saying that's necessarily all has to be the developer, but I think the city needs to work on those things at the same time.

As chair of environmental matters, it is a concern of mine to see so much pavement.

Um we need to be giving people a way out of that.

We're never going to address our climate crisis if we don't address the transportation crisis, not to mention making sure we keep these units affordable.

So I'd really like to see.

So I guess one of my questions coming out of that is what are some of the other things that the city will need to work on and when, such as some of the zoning changes.

Like, is this allowed right now per the zoning?

Yes.

So as we see that's currently permitted in the zoning.

As far as the density, yes.

Okay.

It's the same thing for SPACO or SPA road site, or just this site.

This just this site in particular.

Okay.

So I just want to again challenge my colleagues.

I think we need to get take a closer look at some of our parking requirements.

I I really don't think it's a good idea to be adding, and I think it's often needed, uh, if a large portion of these residents or even a high proportion would be using um public transportation.

So I guess that might be I don't know if that's a question for you or our transportation department, as far as do we have data as far as that hack of residents in this particular community.

How many have a car, how many don't, how many rely solely on public transportation?

We did gather a lot of information when we did the resident surveys with regards to the transportation needs.

Um, but you're correct that there are several elements to this project, whether there be the roads, transportation, bike lanes, um, all types of infrastructure issues which will require for the city to participate with us as partners.

So this is not the kind of project where we come up with a design and then come to the city for approval.

This is the kind of project that we create with the city of Annapolis.

And all along the way, we are vetting all of the issues that you have uh just mentioned.

Um that is the only way this type of project works.

Yeah.

Um, and so, which is the whole concept of the we've been saying choice neighborhood, but honestly, it's the process of choice neighborhood that we benefit from because it forces us to collaborate on all the infrastructure needs, storm water management, all the forestration.

We are trying to also do this in tandem with the development of Hawkins Cove.

And so there has to be a high level of collaboration for this project, Hawkins Cove project, for all of it to be successful.

So you're correct.

And it's actually how this development project is structured.

So we have and will continue to have many meetings with the city staff, planning and zoning, public works, several different departments with regards to the type of infrastructure that's needed and the issues that we're going to face, even all the unknowns that we will run across as you do with any development project.

So you're correct in that.

So there are lots of issues.

Yeah.

Parking being one of them that we have to come to an agreement on and with the full approval of the city.

So when we are at the point where we have our detailed specs, we will be forwarding that to the city staff, and we have those conversations of all the considerations.

Okay, yeah, good.

That's good to hear.

And I don't know how the administration wants to handle it, but at some point it would be good to have some of these conversations more closely with plan and zoning or how to address some of our concerns before what other pieces of our zoning code do we need to tweak.

Because again, if we can I you know, typically our development follows this very boilerplate.

Oh, this is this this is this type of development, this size, it needs this amount of parking.

Without actually looking at the actual need, right?

Of the the planned residents at the property.

And so I think we need to really get that ironed out.

Um, because again, I think if if we can reduce the surface parking, we can add more housing on this site and have more flexibility on the spot creek side.

Um, and also like we saw abroad, those of us who went over to uh Sweden, we saw you know, they lead with transportation, they don't need parking, and so they put in child care centers, they put in health care centers, they put in these amenities for the community instead of parking, which they're not necessarily gonna need, right?

And so I would love to partner.

I really want to see.

I mean, I've been convinced by my colleagues about the need for the housing, but I really want to see this be an example of truly sustainable green and affordable development again.

And so I think I like what you're saying about the bike lanes.

Uh I love it.

Um, so just the questions as far as the affordability.

I'm sorry if I missed this, but out of the 722, how many would be below market rate or equivalent?

Um, we have to have uh 357 affordable units, the same amount of units that are deemed affordable right now.

You have to have a one-for-one replacement uh within that.

So additional units uh are required for choice purposes to be of mixed income.

Okay, and they could be a wide range from private market to that missing middle demographic 80 to 100%, uh 120% AMI.

So it we can vary, and that's what we intend to do, um, so that there'll be people of all income levels in the same neighborhood.

So the key is for there should never it should never be that someone can determine how much income you make by virtue of your address.

So that is the goal of redeveloping the community so that uh it's not distinguishable, um, which is the affordable part of the neighborhood versus you know the uh more closer to um market rate homes.

Okay, so two final questions.

Um do you have could you send more details on the relocation plan?

Uh so how many households would be, I don't know if you've gotten this might be getting too far ahead of ourselves, but how many hassles will be required to temporarily temporarily relocate.

I think maybe seeing the phased map showing the phases with the existing development might help clarify some of this because I just want to make sure people are gonna be displaced and that they'll have places to go to because I believe my my wife is a social worker and it it is so difficult to find space for people.

Um so uh I just think we need to be really thinking ahead on it.

Well, I can say we don't have that level of detail now, other than knowing the number of people that are living on site now will have the right to return uh once the redevelopment is finished, and if they are still living there, once we start redevelopment, would be sub may be subject to relocation.

Okay, and so um we would know specifically the number closer to the time, let's say that we close on the project, we would have those hard numbers as far as the number of people that are actually um relocating.

So it's a bit transient right now because uh we're not sure who uh is going to be living on site at the time that uh we close.

Um so once the closing occurs, that's uh the kickoff to uh the actual relocation uh movement.

The planning goes a well a year or so well before all of that.

Um but uh we once you close, you have to give residents a 90-day notice at a minimum for relocation.

But prior to that, there are several other notices of more so get ready notices, general information notices about this project or this site will be subject to redevelopment, and at some point you're gonna re have to relocate.

In fact, we've already sent those letters to uh residents, so that happens at least 18 months before the closing to help get families ready.

So we're now uh at the point where we will start beginning in the next couple months doing individual surveys with the families to assess what their individual family needs are in this process, and from there we determine you know who is moving and how many and so on and so forth.

And so would this be managed by Hacker or different private management company?

It's a joint project with the developer uh management team will be the new owner of the development and Hacker.

So it happens, so the way we do redevelopment projects, it's through a joint team effort.

We have biweekly redevelopment meet uh relocation meetings specifically for that topic.

And so, but the uh developer does um plan to uh hire, I believe, housing unlimited who specializes in relocation uh for families.

I don't see a pool ultimate savage.

Let me move on to other questions, other individuals.

Yes, we do have a pool.

We have to have a pool.

All right, uh Alder Woman Smith, I'm sorry, alder woman, also Johnson, excuse me.

Thank you, Maya.

Um Altimate Savage touched a lot.

Well, I was gonna talk about by me being the chairperson of transportation, because that's what came to me bing bling bling transportation.

Is that gonna stop the roots and uh when the buses come, you know, because you got school buses that can be coming, you gotta get with the city, and then you're gonna have people that be on dials this um treatments maybe be coming to pick them up.

Um, how are you gonna notify all these people about the transportation part uh when you're doing the um phases?

Well, that's part of our our planning and our communications plan where we do these projects.

So we have uh partnerships with the school district um with other transportation with the city um with uh print transportation services for medical purposes.

There's a whole uh slew of partners we have to collaborate with in order to ensure uh as uh minimal, even though the entire process is disruptive by nature, um, but to try at to uh reduce uh questions or confusion, particularly with regards to access or what do people do in this transition period?

um with uh print transportation services for medical purposes there's a whole uh slew of partners we have to collaborate with um in order to ensure uh as uh minimal even though the entire process is disruptive by nature um but to try at to uh reduce uh questions or confusion particularly with regards to access or what do people do in this transition period and so um so there will be residents that opt to stay on site because that's what they want to do in terms of their temporary relocation so that'll be minimal impact as far as where they live but there will be some that may opt to move off site or utilize a voucher so we have to outline to them what their options are also um because they too will have a right to return if they're a current resident um yeah because I I know that's gonna really come up a lot you know where are we gonna park you know why you can do into construction where we go and blah blah blah yes yeah okay great that's good to know thank you and I could um invite the director Mark is more to come in visit and you can come back and talk at it one our meetings when we get closer I guess to that would be great the projects okay thanks for coming out today thank you thank you I'm not going to ask anyone to make a motion but if anyone wants to continue working past eleven we'll need a motion up I'm ready to propose that motion um but I don't want to uh I just have a couple questions see if you can get your questions done and we might not need the motion the uh the 11 o'clock motion so I don't know if I am super excited about this or scared to death um both you know on the way forward here so on one side we've got this great partnership going and all that and on the other side we really don't know where the risk is like what if this developer goes out of business five years into it and things like that so I don't want that answer now.

But as we go forward and I think Mr.

Mayor I'm looking really at you and saying this is unique.

And when I look at how hard Esport Lofts was and that's 98 units and for us to think that we're gonna add 350 homes on the end of Boucher Avenue without a massive impact on the city I think every day we don't address this we're just making it harder when we get there.

So I I think Mr.

Mayor what I'd like to do to propose to you is we put together a small group of city council members and civic leaders and look at adequate public facilities look at the whole gambit and and use the lessons learned of Eastport Lofts and how do we ensure that we're addressing all of these very important topics in order to get to success I think I did that before 11 o'clock.

You did but but but does that make sense to you Mr.

Mayor that I this is follow up I I um my instinct is that the uh director of planning and zoning should be leading the city's vers half of that conversation um and engaging with the uh director um director maddox Evans um rather than create something new yeah and and I think that that makes sense but but one of the things that scares scares me to death is my email is gonna go out in in a two weeks and say hey 722 is a firm number that's approved and I might get people saying yeah Frank that you're the only guy that didn't know that I don't think I'm gonna hear that.

It I would not call it approved I mean they have not yet submitted a plan to the city for approval.

That's what we heard earlier tonight.

You heard me ask that so there's until there's a plan to review the director is going to be very cautious about saying what's approved or not um so I I still view us as being far from that point.

I think your underlying concerns are completely valid and I share the concerns and I think we can both be excited and scared of yeah I'm concerned about impacts to traffic to schools although I and police and fire even aside from the A APF context more people means more ambulances so even if it passed this the exact standards it's gonna have an impact.

So yeah I share all your concerns but I just and and I would add to that and applaud you're this is probably the only development in the last X number of years where the mayor of Annapolis met with the superintendent of schools to in you and older woman Conte uh and met with him to draw attention to this so it that's an example of how many special one offs this massive project is going to take.

Yes.

I also think in that task force we should take into mind the concerns of the people who are struggling to keep a roof in their head which is one in three Annapolitans due to our housing shortage.

All right I'm not seeing anyone else asking um the director for any further questions so I'm going to uh take upon myself to thank you again and excuse you and um with hindsight I would have scheduled this differently so you were not waiting until 11 o'clock at night to finish your presentation.

But thank you for your uh time and patience and being here tonight.

Thank you Ms.

Walls always a pleasure to see you.

Appreciate everyone here in the audience this this particular item is now closed.

Ms city attorney will you please present the next item on the agenda the agenda is completed.

Anything else for the good of the order motion to adjourn.

Second second all those in favor say aye.

Aye we're adjourned